Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
The subject iof morality and ethics is complicated, but the answer to the religiou angle is simple.
If I may borrow Arach's style..
"No morality without God"
"Yes there is."
"Morality is found in the Bible."
"No it isn't".
Both those rejoinders are provable.
I think the two shake -up thoughts are:
Moral codes exited a thousand years before the Law was supposedly given to Moses - around 12 -11 B.C.
The same parts of your brain light up when you think about what your opinions are and what God's opinions are. Don't we from time to time hear that some churchgoer wants to find a fresh church because he doesn't agree with what the present one thinks or teaches? Of course the church is wrong and he is right because God is putting his morals into his head. The Church has 'gone astray..probably misled by Satan..'
Last edited by TRANSPONDER; 01-25-2017 at 03:39 AM..
Why do believers have such a hard time with this question? Is it because they only behave in a moral and ethical way because of the threat of eternal damnation? Disregard the hypocritical religious (the majority) and focus on the question that perplexes them.
Why would a person live by the Golden Rule when there's no benefit to them?
I'm amazed at the number of people who seem to be intelligent that can't grasp why a person would be a good person without an ulterior motive. It must be sad going through life "knowing" people are only do gooders to win favor with an adult make believe friend who doesn't care if they live or die.
Omg I know just answer the damn question already!! For a person who devotes their life to religion - especially the "eternal hell" crowd goodness equals a fear of the alternative of not being good and eternal punishment. It's interesting now as an atheist after years of being a Christian I am now able to answer that question. I used to wonder if I would be a moral and decent human being without being raised religious - or living as a religious person - whether or not I would be good person without it and the answer to that is a resounding YES.
Sorry if this is grammatically incorrect or otherwise I have the flu but I need to vent about this, it's important to making people realize that religion is not necessary - for anything. I was in group therapy yesterday when I had to leave because I'm sick but the conversation turned to going to AA or NA and the reason I will not go is because of the religious aspect. In spite of my shortcomings I am and will continue to be a loving, caring giving, understanding, thoughtful, moral and ethical human being and it is because that is what makes the world and other people better.
I want to be better mentally so I'm working on that but isn't it true that we are all a work in progress and if we are not constantly trying to better ourselves then we are stagnant and of no real use to ourselves or others. Maybe that's a little harsh but I believe it to be true. I don't have all the answers but this one question I can answer with confidence after being on both sides - you do not need religion to be a good person - it is a choice.
I do my best to live by the Golden Rule. I look forward to the day when it's renamed "common sense". *******s attract *******s and all that jazz. Hell, I even got to experience my ex-wife apologize to me and ask why I didn't hate her. I guess taking the high ground does work sometimes. I never expected that to happen, though!
I try to give more than I take. I think it boils down to the previous poster mentioning they'd rather feel good than bad. So perhaps there is a selfish aspect to it but there's nothing wrong with being selfish. We all are to one degree or another.
Omg I know just answer the damn question already!! For a person who devotes their life to religion - especially the "eternal hell" crowd goodness equals a fear of the alternative of not being good and eternal punishment. It's interesting now as an atheist after years of being a Christian I am now able to answer that question. I used to wonder if I would be a moral and decent human being without being raised religious - or living as a religious person - whether or not I would be good person without it and the answer to that is a resounding YES.
Sorry if this is grammatically incorrect or otherwise I have the flu but I need to vent about this, it's important to making people realize that religion is not necessary - for anything. I was in group therapy yesterday when I had to leave because I'm sick but the conversation turned to going to AA or NA and the reason I will not go is because of the religious aspect. In spite of my shortcomings I am and will continue to be a loving, caring giving, understanding, thoughtful, moral and ethical human being and it is because that is what makes the world and other people better.
I want to be better mentally so I'm working on that but isn't it true that we are all a work in progress and if we are not constantly trying to better ourselves then we are stagnant and of no real use to ourselves or others. Maybe that's a little harsh but I believe it to be true. I don't have all the answers but this one question I can answer with confidence after being on both sides - you do not need religion to be a good person - it is a choice.
Absolutely, and correct in every respect. And particularly pointed coming from one who was a very resolute apologist for a very non-liberal religious view. I rather think that the best response to the idea that we need religion or we'd run amok is to ask whether that's what they'd do if they lost their religion.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Campfires
I do my best to live by the Golden Rule. I look forward to the day when it's renamed "common sense". *******s attract *******s and all that jazz. Hell, I even got to experience my ex-wife apologize to me and ask why I didn't hate her. I guess taking the high ground does work sometimes. I never expected that to happen, though!
I try to give more than I take. I think it boils down to the previous poster mentioning they'd rather feel good than bad. So perhaps there is a selfish aspect to it but there's nothing wrong with being selfish. We all are to one degree or another.
That's true too. There's no point in beating ourselves up because we tend to think of what's good for us. Just accept that is how we are but don't let it override consideration for others. Why? because every time I open the local daily I read of what it looks like when people just look out for number one and don't care if that means causing harm to others.
Why wouldn't a person do the right things regardless of a fear of hell? A person would have to be pretty sick not to be a decently compassionate human being simply because it's the right thing to do.
I just want to comment on this because although it seems obvious that we should be moral and it can seem obvious that morality doesn't come from religion, I think asking why we would be moral is a valid point. Indeed, I also support the motion that you should do good without divine inspiration in the form of eternal condemnation.
The problem with saying "we should do good", is that "good" is not well defined in the absence of an objective moral code. This is what theists will tend to latch on to. Personally, I think this doesn't matter. I believe I've pretty clearly laid down my position on morality and its origins in evolution.
That said, if there is no grounding for morality, why would you choose to do what we consider "good"?
Quote:
Originally Posted by DuckOfMs
I feel good when I do good things.
I feel bad when I do bad things.
I prefer to feel good.
I like how DuckOfMs said it, and I think the cause of "feeling good" can be explained by evolution.
As in most things, we rarely work it out for ourselves. We are taught it. What we are taught is not always good, or at least later generations may think again about it. This is also true of religion which has to revise its views on the teachings while pretending that it hasn't. This disposes of the idea that if secular morality can't be shown to have an intrinsic firm basis, then the Bible (or whatever book one was taught to revere) is the reliable source of morality.
But there are some understandable basics to morality. At bottom is the instinct to survive, ourselves, our group and our species. The first lesson is reciprocity. If you want to survive, it helps if the guy in the nexy street doesn't beat you up. And a good way of not giving him a reason is in not going out to try to beat him up.
Of course as soon as you got a society bigger than a few hunting parties forced to co-operate to bring down bison and never a sight of a Rival tribe is that people are awkward and selfish and that's why you needed a town headman to decide, because you couldn't rely on the two parties to come to an amicable arrangement. Thus we got moral or at least social codes to make sure you didn't make contrary decisions. But this didn't always work and humanity had struggled with feuds, gang rumbles and wars. And we know what we ought to do to avoid that happening, but it is awfully difficult to find a way of doing it. But, for my money, religion does nothing much to help as opposed to the support it gives to division and conflict. And neither to be fair does evolved instinct.
Startrek of all things tried to work out a culture that had reasoned its way out of a bloody past to a peaceful rational present, but seemed to spend most of its time spent in showing how much of a fake and artificial solution it was to the problem.
Some wonderful posts here. Being moral has nothing to do with taking a mythology literally! I love what Northsouth said, religion is not necessary - for anything. Yes!
Why do believers have such a hard time with this question? Is it because they only behave in a moral and ethical way because of the threat of eternal damnation? Disregard the hypocritical religious (the majority) and focus on the question that perplexes them.
Why would a person live by the Golden Rule when there's no benefit to them?
I'm amazed at the number of people who seem to be intelligent that can't grasp why a person would be a good person without an ulterior motive. It must be sad going through life "knowing" people are only do gooders to win favor with an adult make believe friend who doesn't care if they live or die.
That question used to bother me, until I realized that religious people really are amoral monsters who only behave decently because they think God is just waiting for them to slip up.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
