Turn on thread page Beta

Morality for Atheists... watch

Announcements
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by paella)
    I always think atheists with a concept of right and wrong are rather farcical. You have to have an objective standard (e.g. an all knowing God) to base your beliefs on, otherwise your morals are just self imposed limits.
    Never heard of humanism?
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    tbh without the "good book" to follow I can change my morals pretty damn quickly. IMO it makes me a stronger person, I won't waste money on hobo's or tramps and expect no help myself. Why be a "good" person?
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Nashy19)
    I said they can tell me what God would and would not ask them to do, not "Their god tells them to do something so they do it".
    If they can say that God would not tell them to do something then they are deciding what is right or wrong, not God.
    ...I'm still confused here.

    I don't get the bolded bit. At all.

    They can say that "God" will tell them not to do something.

    1) For them not to do it would mean them going against their "God", which many religious folk won't do.
    2) For them to do it means that they have no morals, they just do what they are told to do.

    That explains my confusion.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by iwilson03)
    Never heard of humanism?
    lool, humanism is a word conjured up by philosophers, not some moral code I need to abide by. You can do good things and say they're based on humanism, but you might as well do good things and say it's based on the ******* bible. They are both unfounded tbh.
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by RiddleMeThis)
    lool, humanism is a word conjured up by philosophers, not some moral code I need to abide by. You can do good things and say they're based on humanism, but you might as well do good things and say it's based on the ******* bible. They are both unfounded tbh.
    How is humanism unfounded? It's based on human society and getting the 'best' life out of the one that we get for as many people as possible. It is a very real concept. Yeah sure you might do similar things without reference to humanism, but that doesn't stop it existing as a model. Anyway when did I say that you need to abide by it?
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by RiddleMeThis)
    tbh without the "good book" to follow I can change my morals pretty damn quickly. IMO it makes me a stronger person, I won't waste money on hobo's or tramps and expect no help myself. Why be a "good" person?
    Just so you know that's not a question that concerns morality.
    A moral question would be "what is moral".
    The question "why should I be moral" is down to what you want to convey in yourself.
    Moral questions lead to you knowing what actions to take to be a 'moral agent'.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by iwilson03)
    How is humanism unfounded? It's based on human society and getting the 'best' life out of the one that we get for as many people as possible. It is a very real concept. Yeah sure you might do similar things without reference to humanism, but that doesn't stop it existing as a model. Anyway when did I say that you need to abide by it?
    Humanism is not morality by a long shot, and will never be.They are both pretty ridiculous tbh, and for either "weak" or "good" people, who can't look after themselves. Morality is based on religion, thus has no real basis, and humanism is just a cowardly creation of society. I have no time for either; I can kinda see why the God squad believe in morality, as science is yet to fully uncover the bibles tales and histories, but the concept of humanism is only for little people so they can feel safe in their beds at night. I am not a little person, therefore why would I bother.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by there's too much love)
    Just so you know that's not a question that concerns morality.
    A moral question would be "what is moral".
    The question "why should I be moral" is down to what you want to convey in yourself.
    Moral questions lead to you knowing what actions to take to be a 'moral agent'.
    Ok, why make good actions or gestures?
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by saalih)
    What are it's limits? Do they change with time? Are they relative? Do they differ from place to place?

    Yes there might be some things which do not change like stealing, murder, etc..

    but as far as I know premarital sex was wrong/immoral/unethical some time ago in almost every secular society...but now it has become some sort of a norm.
    this is just an example...

    so what is morality for an atheist?
    Except for that bit where God is supposed to somehow, non-cognitively, induce a morality (kind of like he was supposed to somehow, non-cognitively, create a universe), I don't see any difference.

    It's the same old God of the gaps, except applied to morality instead of the physical world.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    I love the implication that if religious-folk didn't have religion, they'd all be psychopathic killers with no conscience.

    I don't need to be scared of an all mighty being to do what's right. Empathy and conscience help me to be a better person *nods*
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Diminutive)
    I love the implication that if religious-folk didn't have religion, they'd all be psychopathic killers with no conscience.

    I don't need to be scared of an all mighty being to do what's right. Empathy and conscience help me to be a better person *nods*
    lol
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by RiddleMeThis)
    Ok, why make good actions or gestures?
    You've just rephrased the same question.
    I'm not saying it's a bad question, it's just not one I feel I can answer properly at the moment, I'm between a fair few philosophies at the moment.

    I'm just letting you know that that question isn't what strictly speaking would be called a 'moral question'.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by there's too much love)
    You've just rephrased the same question.
    I'm not saying it's a bad question, it's just not one I feel I can answer properly at the moment, I'm between a fair few philosophies at the moment.

    I'm just letting you know that that question isn't what strictly speaking would be called a 'moral question'.
    because it can't be logically answered; the only reason I see for "morality" or "humanism" is to excel and protect yourself within society. I can decide how much of it I can use to my advantage and I will have that much. **** "good" deeds though.
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by RiddleMeThis)
    because it can't be logically answered; the only reason I see for "morality" or "humanism" is to excel and protect yourself within society. I can decide how much of it I can use to my advantage and I will have that much. **** "good" deeds though.
    My aren't you full of presumptions and essentially horse ****.
    All I was saying was:
    A moral question is one that asks for a prescription of an action that you would take to be a 'moral agent'.
    The question you're posing doesn't relate to moral philosophy.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by there's too much love)
    My aren't you full of presumptions and essentially horse ****.
    All I was saying was:
    A moral question is one that asks for a prescription of an action that you would take to be a 'moral agent'.
    The question you're posing doesn't relate to moral philosophy.
    touché
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by You Failed)
    What a load of crap. There doesn't need to be a believe in a higher being in order for you have to have some sort of respect for the people that surround you in this world.

    It's not a case of "I shouldn't kill this guy because then I'll go to hell", it's a simple case of "I shouldn't kill this guy because what right do I have to decide the fate of his life for him". All morals can exist without having to bring any sort of higher being into the equation.
    EXACTLY!....That ^..............I think an atheist with morals deserves to go to heaven more than a Christian, because he didn't expect anything in return
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    People saying Humanism is stupid, surely it's just a term for an outlook many have?

    Basically it's for the greater good that we work together as a species, look out for one another, be kind. It is stupid for me to attack another human for no reason? Would I want to be attacked? No. Would I appreciate someone defending me, or helping me when I am in trouble, yes. Race, sexuality, it doesn't matter, it's all nature. Obviously some think the latter is a choice...even if it is, it doesn't harm you...so why harm them?

    Do unto others as you would have them do unto you may be a religious quote, but that simple idea has existed long before the religions of today, before any religion(since I'm Atheist, taking the stance their man made.).
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by paella)
    I always think atheists with a concept of right and wrong are rather farcical. You have to have an objective standard (e.g. an all knowing God) to base your beliefs on, otherwise your morals are just self imposed limits.
    It seems here you are trying to be unfair about the definition of morality and restrict it's definition to include only the religious. Atheists are still human and morality comes with that humanity. A life without God does not strip us of our consciences and our compassion. However, an atheist's morality is not governed by fear, it is not honed towards a narrow minded view of what is right. An atheists morality is governed by thought and reason. For a theist, the decision between right and wrong is already made by the supposedly "all knowing God". I think you, sir, are the one guilty of farcical morality.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by adamrules247)
    Any athiests who have morals also have doubts about their own beliefs
    Atheists don't hold any beliefs, isn't the point of the world to group people without beliefs.
    and even if the they did, you're still very wrong.
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by saalih)
    what is "good" for you can be immoral for someone else..

    for example a mother whose husband died might go around having sex with other men, now that act might be immoral according to her children but "good" according to her...!! so what is the criteria? is it every man for himself to define what is good or bad?
    It's society, which has been created over hundreds/thousands of years by its people.

    And yeah, I don't actually think there's 'good' or 'bad' in the world, but I used it to explain my argument (because it'd take ages otherwise).

    Generalised:
    Morality for very religious people = holy books/depending on where they lived, then sociey's norm

    Morality for moderately religious people = holy books/friend's different beliefs/society's norm. etc (pretty much the same, just less !!!)

    Morality for everyone else = society's norm and upbringing (which in most cases, is either religious or came from religious belief XD)

    Wow that was pointless. XD
 
 
 
Poll
Cats or dogs?
Useful resources

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

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