Turn on thread page Beta

Morality for Atheists... watch

Announcements
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    For an atheist, morality is a fluid concept. To ask whether an atheist's moral code changes over time is simply ignorance: by definition, an atheist does not believe in a supreme power. That means God, an eternal moral code...or otherwise.

    Whereas religious people must accept that a God-given, rigid moral code outlines 'the good life', an atheist must make his or her own decision regarding what the 'good' is. An atheist's moral code, therefore, is in definition with their view of the good. This may be adherence to common law, for instance, or the Utilitarian solution.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by CityOfMyHeart)
    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
    I'm sorry but you are just completely wrong.

    Are you saying Morality can only exist through a being which we have no evidence that exists?

    There are many arguements for a God-independant objective morality. Moral cognitivism -> Moral Realism, Plato's forms, Catergorical Imperative. None of these notions rely on God as a mediator but provide a basis for making ethical decisions.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    it's all relative
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by RiddleMeThis)
    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.
    Or maybe it's for people who give a **** about people worse off than them?

    But clearly you are above all this :rolleyes:
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Ludwig Wittgenstein)
    I'm sorry but you are just completely wrong.

    Are you saying Morality can only exist through a being which we have no evidence that exists?

    There are many arguements for a God-independant objective morality. Moral cognitivism -> Moral Realism, Plato's forms, Catergorical Imperative. None of these notions rely on God as a mediator but provide a basis for making ethical decisions.
    No, I'm saying that (for arguments sake) British society and British culture as we know it has been shaped over history by religion and religious beliefs. Some of the laws we have today are based on Christian values, albeit distantly, for example.

    I'm not saying there has to be a God for morality to exist - I didn't say anything near the sort! I don't even believe in God. XD I'm just saying that a lot of the moral values most (but not all) people were brought up with came from religious beliefs and teachings - simply because previous generations were more religious than we were and so shaped traditions etc. in a certain way.

    I'm an Athiest now but was brought up a Hindu. My morality didn't pop up from nowhere, or disappear as soon as I stopped being religious. Some of my morals come from Hindu teachings, some just from what my parents have taught me and some from school, friends etc.

    The point is, we all get our morals from somewhere, we're not born with them. We're taught them/make our own as we get older. But most (again not all) of the ones we're taught are based losely on religious ideas of some sort- for example, 'do not kill'. You could argue this forever.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by adamrules247)
    Any athiests who have morals also have doubts about their own beliefs
    You sir, are an Idiot.
    You do not have to follow any certain religion to have morals. I'm an atheist, I most certainly do have morals yet I do not doubt my beliefs at all.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by CityOfMyHeart)
    ...
    Oh that's good to know haha. I thought were some Bible bashing moral elitist freak for a mo :rolleyes:
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Ludwig Wittgenstein)
    Oh that's good to know haha. I thought were some Bible bashing moral elitist freak for a mo :rolleyes:
    XD
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Drunk Punx)
    ...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.
    "They can say that "God" will tell them not to do something."

    You start off correct.

    and then...
    "For them not to do it would mean them going against their "God"

    Not to do what, what God would never tell them do?

    I don't know how much post can be interpreted in an alternative way, if I was to try and explain I'd just be repeating myself.

    1. Mortality comes from God
    2. Theists can tell us the "evil" things God would never ask of them
    3. Thus there morality can not come from God, I think it comes from the same place as Atheists.

    Hey look I wrote it again, maybe it was the format :p:
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by saalih)
    which Hindus actually said that today it is not alright to throw widows into the funeral pyre? religious Hindu clerics or the general public? can any Hindu come out and say what his religion teaches even if he does not have the proper knowledge of the original Hindu texts?
    It was a mixture of both. Original Hindu texts were passed orally for several hundreds of years and the written texts are large interpolations of original stories and texts and are also open to interpretation by different people. Thus within the Hindu religion there existed conflict about this matter even when it was regarded as morally alright by the majority of general public and Hindu clerics.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by iwilson03)
    Or maybe it's for people who give a **** about people worse off than them?

    But clearly you are above all this :rolleyes:
    Why do you give a ****? And why should I?
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by RiddleMeThis)
    Why do you give a ****? And why should I?
    Well I'm not going to 'preach' to you, if you read the news and don't feel compelled to give a **** then you probably never will.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by iwilson03)
    Well I'm not going to 'preach' to you, if you read the news and don't feel compelled to give a **** then you probably never will.
    Because you can't preach to me and you don't know why you can't. Morality is unfounded; therefore any delusion that you should actually give a **** is ridiculous. If I could legally get away with killing someone, and if killing that person would be advantageous to me, I would have no problem with it. Tell me why I should have a problem with it, if you can.
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by RiddleMeThis)
    Because you can't preach to me and you don't know why you can't. Morality is unfounded; therefore any delusion that you should actually give a **** is ridiculous. If I could legally get away with killing someone, and if killing that person would be advantageous to me, I would have no problem with it. Tell me why I should have a problem with it, if you can.
    Or maybe because I can't be bothered to talk about it? You have a warped view on life, I'm not all that bothered to be honest.

    To humour you before I go - you should have a problem with it because killing someone is final. That is their chance in life gone, because it could have tragic consequences to their family etc etc. -- empathy is one of the greatest human attributes. I doubt very much that you would ever kill someone just for self gain - that takes a special kind of *******.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by iwilson03)
    Or maybe because I can't be bothered to talk about it? You have a warped view on life, I'm not all that bothered to be honest.

    To humour you before I go - you should have a problem with it because killing someone is final. That is their chance in life gone, because it could have tragic consequences to their family etc etc. -- empathy is one of the greatest human attributes. I doubt very much that you would ever kill someone just for self gain - that takes a special kind of *******.
    No, all it takes is an accurate view of life.
    lol & empathy isn't an attribute, it's just our ability to put ourselves in a position of pain- it is nothing more than a barrier, warping the views of life.
    Why should I be empathetic anyway?

    "If God does not exist, everything is permitted."

    The guy who came up with this is a whole lot smarter than you, so I am inclined accept this.
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by RiddleMeThis)
    No, all it takes is an accurate view of life.
    lol & empathy isn't an attribute, it's just our ability to put ourselves in a position of pain- it is nothing more than a barrier, warping the views of life.
    Why should I be empathetic anyway?

    "If God does not exist, everything is permitted."

    The guy who came up with this is a whole lot smarter than you, so I am inclined accept this.
    An accurate view of life? So an accurate view of life is that you can treat people in whatever way you want? Well, enjoy your probably quite short life.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by iwilson03)
    An accurate view of life? So an accurate view of life is that you can treat people in whatever way you want? Well, enjoy your probably quite short life.
    I'm not following your train of thought here wilson my old chum.

    I will be able to see what is going to benefit and disadvantage me in my life, without ridiculous morals interfering. I obviously won't kill someone if it means I will get put in jail. Why are you arguing for morality unless you're religious?

    And yes that is an accurate view of life; when I dismissed religion for the crap it is I chose accuracy and ruthlessness over pleasantness and kindness. I think I know which ones are going to further my prospects.
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by RiddleMeThis)
    I'm not following your train of thought here wilson my old chum.

    I will be able to see what is going to benefit and disadvantage me in my life, without ridiculous morals interfering. I obviously won't kill someone if it means I will get put in jail. Why are you arguing for morality unless you're religious?

    And yes that is an accurate view of life; when I dismissed religion for the crap it is I chose accuracy and ruthlessness over pleasantness and kindness. I think I know which ones are going to further my prospects.
    Morality doesn't have to go with religion.
    You're basically appealing to Hobbe's social contract theory.
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by RiddleMeThis)
    I'm not following your train of thought here wilson my old chum.

    I will be able to see what is going to benefit and disadvantage me in my life, without ridiculous morals interfering. I obviously won't kill someone if it means I will get put in jail. Why are you arguing for morality unless you're religious?

    And yes that is an accurate view of life; when I dismissed religion for the crap it is I chose accuracy and ruthlessness over pleasantness and kindness. I think I know which ones are going to further my prospects.
    Ah, that actually clarifies things a bit.

    But, yes ruthlessness can be good but at the same time it often won't make you many friends.
    Also - do you never just feel compelled to give to charity? Just because you want others to be successful as well? I mean, on a purely selfish level, less homeless people for instance makes your living environment nicer..

    As well as this, without empathy how can you form a close relationship with someone? You have to understand others to get a long with them.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by iwilson03)
    Ah, that actually clarifies things a bit.

    But, yes ruthlessness can be good but at the same time it often won't make you many friends.
    Also - do you never just feel compelled to give to charity? Just because you want others to be successful as well? I mean, on a purely selfish level, less homeless people for instance makes your living environment nicer..

    As well as this, without empathy how can you form a close relationship with someone? You have to understand others to get a long with them.
    If I could pay a homeless person to forever remove himself from my sight I would. Until that promise is on offer I shall keep all my money, for I see no reason to give to anyone else.

    I understand others, and I understand their concepts of empathy, which are generally displayed by the fleeting-"that's harsshhh that". People will always regard themselves higher than other individuals-say someone wanted a pair of jeans for £40, and had exactly that amount- In no way would anyone's empathy drive them to donate any of that money to a begging crack whore. Empathy may cause a little selfish discomfort- "that could be me, and I would want money", but nothing past that.

    I have had a number of girlfriends, and see no reason why a lack, or a disregard of empathy would make me any less desirable. Vice versa I think.

    In the end, not needing to abide by a moral code is going to benefit me.
 
 
 
Poll
Could you cope without Wifi?
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.