How does an atheist define morality? (contradiction, preaching, follower, service)

[bigstu]

a rightness in being self perpetuating?

[Kereczr]

Originally Posted by JViello

7 pages later it's a bit murky. Can you repost?

Well let me ask YOU a question...do you behave a certain way, right and wrong, simply because of what you've read in your bible? For fear of going to hell? How is it that we've come to determine that slavery is wrong? There certainly wasn't any mention of slavery being wrong in the bible, on the contrary it actually contains regulations for slavery, in a way...validating slavery. Also, the same could be said about women being inferior, murder, war, rape, etc.

this is the original post ^_^

[bigstu]

The God of evolution.................... and faith?
Another aspect?
Hidden
Not quite hidden?
The reality of us? An infinite made a mirror?

Same, same, and powerful

[bigstu]

Originally Posted by bigstu

The God of evolution.................... and faith?
Another aspect?
Hidden
Not quite hidden?
The reality of us? An infinite made a mirror?

Same, same, and powerful

Reason, logic, and faith. Reality and faith. We all seek that perception of reality?
That reallness?
That place..............that confluence of true being?
can such a being truly exist? Why not?
The infinite is our playground.

[Racket]

Originally Posted by TheStudent

Quote:
Originally Posted by Racket
It seems to split society into those who are religious - 'do good - and go to heaven'. And those who are atheist - made out to be bad - and go to hell.

Is that a bad thing?

So you are saying that anyone who is not religious has no morals?
i'm sorry to tell you this but I'm sure I read somewhere that only about 2 percent of people in prison are athiest. And that fact could actually be used to prove my point that people need to learn morals other than just because god says so.

Originally Posted by TheStudent

Quote:
Originally Posted by Racket
If that were the case - that the knowlage of the existance of god is built in to both man and beast then why do parents bring up their kids teaching them the religious ways? Why does it need to be taught in schools? And why do people feel the need to go around knocking on doors 'trying to sell' their religion?


Because there's a difference betwixt 'knowlege of the existence of God' and 'Obedience/adherence to the living God'.

So you are saying that if a child was born and nobody ever taught them about god they would still 'know' about him(/her). I think not. Children form christian familys moslty grow up to be christian (if religious at all), Hindu familys...hindu etc. This is because it is what the children have been taught (by parents mostly but also the society around them) NOT because they are born with a build in knowlage of the existance of god.
If god made us all (for arguments sake saying god is real) with a built in knowlage of him, why is there such varience in religions? and why do athiests exsist?
And one more thing:

Originally Posted by TheStudent

both man and beast

You are really trying to say that dogs/cats/etc have a knowlage of the exsistance 'god'. We have to teach them to sit, stay etc but yet they can comprehend god?? Personally I dont think a dog can comprehend the scale of the planet it lives on never mind who or what created it.

[steffan]

Originally Posted by Racket

So you are saying that anyone who is not religious has no morals?
i'm sorry to tell you this but I'm sure I read somewhere that only about 2 percent of people in prison are athiest. And that fact could actually be used to prove my point that people need to learn morals other than just because god says so.



So you are saying that if a child was born and nobody ever taught them about god they would still 'know' about him(/her). I think not. Children form christian familys moslty grow up to be christian (if religious at all), Hindu familys...hindu etc. This is because it is what the children have been taught (by parents mostly but also the society around them) NOT because they are born with a build in knowlage of the existance of god.
If god made us all (for arguments sake saying god is real) with a built in knowlage of him, why is there such varience in religions? and why do athiests exsist?
And one more thing:

You are really trying to say that dogs/cats/etc have a knowlage of the exsistance 'god'. We have to teach them to sit, stay etc but yet they can comprehend god?? Personally I dont think a dog can comprehend the scale of the planet it lives on never mind who or what created it.

I seriously doubt a dog would find either of those relevent to its existence

[Briolat21]

Just so you're aware - there are social rules in a lot of animal societies as well. In wolf packs there are dominant and subservient members, and even the lowest member (the omega) who serves as a scapegoat for the rest of the pack.

In primates (especially bonobos) there are also rules for getting along with another another, showing deference to others, grooming, giving gifts of food to curry favor, etc..

Elephants also have societal rules, and seem to recognize death and try to comfort each other when confronted with death.


Why is it so strange to think then that humans, who most will agree, have the most highly evolved social networking structures and the brains to match - would figure out a basic set of rules to live by?

Hmm... if I kill his child - A) it will hurt him and that will make me sad because I understand other's pain. B) He will kill my child and that will make me more sad.

Answer: Don't Kill.

Etc...

You don't need a higher power to figure these things out. You don't even need that many societal laws.

Will some people live outside these rules and "damn the consequences" - yes - their always have been and always will be these renegades. But as in animal groups, most humans know their place, know the rules and seek to stay comfortably within society.

[GCSTroop]

Originally Posted by Briolat21

Just so you're aware - there are social rules in a lot of animal societies as well. In wolf packs there are dominant and subservient members, and even the lowest member (the omega) who serves as a scapegoat for the rest of the pack.

In primates (especially bonobos) there are also rules for getting along with another another, showing deference to others, grooming, giving gifts of food to curry favor, etc..

Elephants also have societal rules, and seem to recognize death and try to comfort each other when confronted with death.


Why is it so strange to think then that humans, who most will agree, have the most highly evolved social networking structures and the brains to match - would figure out a basic set of rules to live by?

Hmm... if I kill his child - A) it will hurt him and that will make me sad because I understand other's pain. B) He will kill my child and that will make me more sad.

Answer: Don't Kill.

Etc...

You don't need a higher power to figure these things out. You don't even need that many societal laws.

Will some people live outside these rules and "damn the consequences" - yes - their always have been and always will be these renegades. But as in animal groups, most humans know their place, know the rules and seek to stay comfortably within society.

I couldn't agree more. What a lot of people seem to forget is that many of these societal animals, much like early man, live(d) in relatively small groups. The reciprocation of one animal to another helps the species as a whole when living in small groups. Our moral roots seem to dwell within that time when we really depended on one another for assistance. If we were not good reciprocators we probably would not have survived. Early man depended wholly on one another to hunt and to survive. Any weak link could possibly cause the destruction of the group and therefore only the "most moral" (although probably a little different than by our standards today) group would have survived.

[Racket]

Originally Posted by steffan

I seriously doubt a dog would find either of those relevent to its existence

...exactly

[Old Gringo]

Originally Posted by JViello

Perhaps you are missing my point of all this. Taking to a deeper level...

Without "God" we have to be a product of evolution. Right?

BUT, "morality" as we know it, is contrary to the "evolution" and "nature" around us.

That statement is patently false.

Why would we as humans "evolve" contrary to our surroundings?

It just doesn't make sense.

Unless someone can tell me why something like parents and children having intimate sexual contact is wrong besides saying "because it is" or why we would have "compassion" when it's found nowhere in nature or why forced coputlation is wrong when it happens in nature all the time, to me, proves we are unique creatures created as we are and NOT a product of evolution as many say.

So the rest of your nonsense here is pointless and/or incorrect.