• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Morals Without God

sadhatter said:
I hate the " no morality without god" line.
Click to expand...

Problem is, hwo many children ever learn in school that there are other ways of determining right and wrong besides "what the bible says and what my parents told me?" Even in colege, these days, how many studetns really have to take a basic philosophy course (not to mention that the fundamentalist who taught my Phil 101 course dismissed most non-christian philosophy as "crazy"). Many of them seriously do not know that there are other ways of looking at morality and make decisions.
 
what would happen if we were able to excise religion from society? I doubt that science and the naturalistic worldview could fill the void and become an inspiration for the good. Any framework we develop to advocate a certain moral outlook is bound to produce its own list of principles, its own prophets, and attract its own devoted followers, so that it will soon look like any old religion.
Click to expand...

That's nonsense. We already have robust moral frameworks void of magic and we had morals before religions hijacked them.
 
On the other hand, what would happen if we were able to excise religion from society? I doubt that science and the naturalistic worldview could fill the void and become an inspiration for the good.
Click to expand...

I like HansMustermann's analogy. Since a lot of people think religion fulfills some crucial function in our moral systems, it would be difficult to simply abandon it, without replacing it with something (collectively at least; I've heard a few times that individuals that abandon their religion don't feel at all that their moral beliefs suddenly miss some foundation or validation).

I thought De Waal's argument (in the article and the video) was adequate in describing how our social sentiments (empathy, altruism etc.) are based in our biology as social primates, while more elaborate rules follow from negotiation and abstraction).

Any framework we develop to advocate a certain moral outlook is bound to produce its own list of principles, its own prophets, and attract its own devoted followers, so that it will soon look like any old religion.
Click to expand...
I am not sure this necessarily follows. De Waal himself writes that science can help us "understand what kind of animals we are and why our morality looks the way it does". With that, I'd say that as long as we agree that science is allowed to play a role in shaping our morality, it can help us build moral systems that are better than just "any old religion".
 
On the other hand, what would happen if we were able to excise religion from society? I doubt that science and the naturalistic worldview could fill the void and become an inspiration for the good.
Click to expand...

Assuming that this void is really imaginary, in theory it could be "filled" with basic knowledge about how on the one hand a lot of our sentiments our quite natural, and that on the other hand, elaborate moral systems get build on those sentiments, elaborating through abstraction and negotiating contracts. However, in places where religion is very pervasive I don't expect this to be a viable option. :(
 
I don't get why this is framed as a hypothetical. Millions of people have a moral system without believing in any god; millions in the past have as well. It's rather obvious moral systems can exist without any supernatural creators.

Or is the question rather pointed towards moral systems that claim to be The Objective Truth For All Mankind? I'm skeptical of anyone of any faith or lack of faith who claims that.

I don't see any reason humanity won't continue to compete, attempt to raise as superior, and kill each other over particular societies' or individuals' moralities. Doesn't really matter what humans call it. Morality from religion, morality from science, morality from emotion, and so on. The morality that's right is the morality whose proponents can force the opponents to live under that moral system via laws and punishment.

p.s. I disagree with him on his interpretation of The Garden of Earthly Delights, which is at least dark as it is light, if not wholly and subversively heretical (though I may have misunderstood his interpretation).

I also disagree that acceptance of evolution would do anything to puncture a theist's belief in divine morals. God could've designed evolution to produce us as preeminent and ready for him; could've designed atoms to be able to spark DNA and other components of life, etc. The origin of our species doesn't seem to have much to do with the big question here--either it's completely random in which case nontheists' moral bases don't change, or it's God-designed in which case theists' moral bases don't change.
 
Last edited:
HansMustermann said:
So it gets me thinking of religion.

All those people thinking their religion is what gives morals. (Except for the fact that it doesn't, and even they themselves pick and follow just the rules that already fit their moral compass, i.e., just the rules they'd follow anyway.) But if even with religion you still have all this crime and injustice and plain old mean people, and you have (to maintain) an illusion that it actually does something at all... can you imagine how bad it must be without it?

We essentially have the same setup as that fence and gate. The assumption that it must do something just makes the world outside scarier.

Can it be that that's why they're so scared of atheists?
Click to expand...

Very interesting post. I think it fits perfectly with the evidence we have. Think of all those religious people who say that they can't imagine life without god, and how paranoid they generally are about atheists... how they come up with those crazy explanations that Atheists must secretly be worshipping the devil because there couldn't possibly be any other reason to reject god... Your way of looking at it does seem to help make more sense of it all.
 
Morals with God? ever read the Old Testament? that freak has very questionable morals.
 
HansMustermann said:
You know, it gets me kinda thinking. (Which should be your warning it's going to be long and convoluted.)

I was reading recently about gated communities. See, apparently the crime drops right after installing a fence around the neighbourhood, which gets everyone convinced that it's working, but then it slowly gets right right back. People still have to get in and out, including pizza delivery, plumbers, etc, so it's not like it actually creates a perfectly isolated world where just the properly white and upright residends are ever found. So burglars too eventually figure out they can get in.

Worse yet, the ones who do occasionally get to lose time getting in are ambulances and the like. They can't just lift the ambulance or squad car and jump over the fence with it.

So basically you'll still get your **** stolen, and you might die of a heart attack too while the ambulance crew is trying to get someone to open the gate.

But that's just the setup. The interesting part is something else.

Because of the _assumption_ that it works, people basically imagine that the world outside their gates is actually even worse. They actually get anxious when they have to drive outside that fence, because, really, if there's all this crime here where we're all fenced and protected, can you imagine how bad it is outside? They must be mugging and raping each other on every corner.

The illusion of that protection actually makes life scarier. There's actually almost as much crime inside as outside, but because you have to assume that the fence actually does something, you end up assuming that it's so much worse outside it than it really is.

So it gets me thinking of religion.

All those people thinking their religion is what gives morals. (Except for the fact that it doesn't, and even they themselves pick and follow just the rules that already fit their moral compass, i.e., just the rules they'd follow anyway.) But if even with religion you still have all this crime and injustice and plain old mean people, and you have (to maintain) an illusion that it actually does something at all... can you imagine how bad it must be without it?

We essentially have the same setup as that fence and gate. The assumption that it must do something just makes the world outside scarier.

Can it be that that's why they're so scared of atheists?
Click to expand...

That was actually really impressive. When I discuss religious morale with my friends, can I quote you? :D
 
Gawdzilla said:
Prison stats, "religious" vs. "non-religious". End of thread.
Click to expand...

Sorry, I don't know this one. Could you elaborate?
Is it that you can find more religious people in jail?

I always thought that was because you can find a lot of people with poor education and that often is associated with extreme religious belief.
 
Mahaha said:
Sorry, I don't know this one. Could you elaborate?
Is it that you can find more religious people in jail?

I always thought that was because you can find a lot of people with poor education and that often is associated with extreme religious belief.
Click to expand...

Off the cuff, ~95% of the people in US prisons claim to be religious. Avowed atheists make up about 1%. If being religulous gives you a stronger moral framework than being atheistic you would see different number.
 
Gawdzilla said:
Off the cuff, ~95% of the people in US prisons claim to be religious. Avowed atheists make up about 1%. If being religulous gives you a stronger moral framework than being atheistic you would see different number.
Click to expand...

My understanding is that religious inmates have a better shot at parole, which gives incentive for them to lie about it and would skew the statistics towards believers.
 
Gawdzilla said:
Off the cuff, ~95% of the people in US prisons claim to be religious. Avowed atheists make up about 1%. If being religulous gives you a stronger moral framework than being atheistic you would see different number.
Click to expand...
Do those numbers apply to (a) the day the prisoners first set foot in prison; or (b) the day they were set free; or (c) an average over the whole prison population?

I'm asking because, like Beth also hinted at, your hear a lot about prisoners converting to religion, but never hear about a prisoner leaving his/her faith.
 
ddt said:
Do those numbers apply to (a) the day the prisoners first set foot in prison; or (b) the day they were set free; or (c) an average over the whole prison population?
Click to expand...
I don't recall exactly how Mr. Gallup's boys phrased that question, sorry.
I'm asking because, like Beth also hinted at, your hear a lot about prisoners converting to religion, but never hear about a prisoner leaving his/her faith.
Click to expand...
Could it be that the stories are out there and just don't get related by a biased press?
 
Piscivore said:
He's got that exactly backwards. I'm the only one of me there ever was or ever will be. As a completely unique individual, my safety, security, and happiness is paramount. My wife and kids come next, because they are also unique and special, but in extremis I can find another mate and make more kids. at the far lowest end, "the species" and life itself are valuable inso much as they serve my needs.
Click to expand...

Ayn Rand called, she wants you to meet up in the afterlife and rape have forceful intercourse with her.
 
HansMustermann said:
You know, it gets me kinda thinking. (Which should be your warning it's going to be long and convoluted.)

I was reading recently about gated communities. See, apparently the crime drops right after installing a fence around the neighbourhood, which gets everyone convinced that it's working, but then it slowly gets right right back. People still have to get in and out, including pizza delivery, plumbers, etc, so it's not like it actually creates a perfectly isolated world where just the properly white and upright residends are ever found. So burglars too eventually figure out they can get in.

Worse yet, the ones who do occasionally get to lose time getting in are ambulances and the like. They can't just lift the ambulance or squad car and jump over the fence with it.

So basically you'll still get your **** stolen, and you might die of a heart attack too while the ambulance crew is trying to get someone to open the gate.

But that's just the setup. The interesting part is something else.

Because of the _assumption_ that it works, people basically imagine that the world outside their gates is actually even worse. They actually get anxious when they have to drive outside that fence, because, really, if there's all this crime here where we're all fenced and protected, can you imagine how bad it is outside? They must be mugging and raping each other on every corner.

The illusion of that protection actually makes life scarier. There's actually almost as much crime inside as outside, but because you have to assume that the fence actually does something, you end up assuming that it's so much worse outside it than it really is.

So it gets me thinking of religion.

All those people thinking their religion is what gives morals. (Except for the fact that it doesn't, and even they themselves pick and follow just the rules that already fit their moral compass, i.e., just the rules they'd follow anyway.) But if even with religion you still have all this crime and injustice and plain old mean people, and you have (to maintain) an illusion that it actually does something at all... can you imagine how bad it must be without it?

We essentially have the same setup as that fence and gate. The assumption that it must do something just makes the world outside scarier.

Can it be that that's why they're so scared of atheists?
Click to expand...

Working in a phone service job in which i schedualed appointments for computer service, i can attest to the paranoia and headache caused by the gated community.

I found, by and large, the people living in the gated communities spent much more time asking me about the agent ( for example " do they have a criminal record" "are they trustworthy" etc. As if , if they were not i would say " Hell now, he is a serial killer who likes to steal.") , and calling in because the agent could not get in , than anyone else.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom