 |
| |
|
| |
|
|
loinburger
|
 |
Sweet Sauce Jones
Jul 1999
time: 00:16
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Wiglaf
If the whole world did not see anything wrong with abortion, murder, rape, etc, we'd be going downhill fast. Simple civil laws wouldn't hold people back forever. Religion is therefore inborn because it is vital to survival, much like reflex and the like. |
Wrong. Morality is therefore inborn because it is vital to survival, and morality is not the same thing as religion (particularly your extremist Christian morality, where you can be a good person but are still going to hell if you don't love god or go to the correct church or whatever have you).
The only reason to equate morality and religion is if the only reason that you try to be a good person is to avoid going to hell(in which case we needn't even love god to get into heaven, we only need to fear him; Nietzsche was right, the will to power is all that matters, and god is the one with all of the power). We could just as easily worship Pharoah if we believed that Pharoah held the keys to heaven.
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
Wiglaf
|
 |
Cambridge
Dec 2000
time: 23:16
|
|
- "Wrong. Morality is therefore inborn because it is vital to survival, and morality is not the same thing as religion (particularly your extremist Christian morality, where you can be a good person but are still going to hell if you don't love god or go to the correct church or whatever have you)." -
Well you most certainly acted like a level one jackass there, my friend. I don't hold an extremist view of religion; if you live a good life but don't go to church, the overall effect on your final judgement is actually minimal. That's official dogma anyways, no crap. Totally - completely - rejecting god, though, is another story.
- "The only reason to equate morality and religion is if the only reason that you try to be a good person is to avoid going to hell(in which case we needn't even love god to get into heaven, we only need to fear him; Nietzsche was right, the will to power is all that matters, and god is the one with all of the power). We could just as easily worship Pharoah if we believed that Pharoah held the keys to heaven." -
Religion is a form of morality, morality is a form of religion. If you are moral, you are essentially religious one way or another and probably will be rewarded as such. You can love god in many ways - obviously going to church, etc are good for support - but being an all around good person is your best bet and the primary goal of all believers and nonbelievers alike. Obviously though you shouldn't be so narrow minded about religion and completely shut it out from your life, or you'll make things quite a bit harder on yourself if there is indeed a god.
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
ranskaldan
|
 |
Beijing ~ Singapore ~ Toronto ~ All hail to the new Rome
Sep 2001
time: 00:16
|
|
quote:
Religion is a form of morality, morality is a form of religion. If you are moral, you are essentially religious one way or another and probably will be rewarded as such. You can love god in many ways - obviously going to church, etc are good for support - but being an all around good person is your best bet and the primary goal of all believers and nonbelievers alike. |
Wrong.
One of the main arguments i've seen coming from religious people is that 'morality is a form of religion'. Thus they go on to claim that 'if you're moral, you're religious', 'the only reason to be moral is religion' or 'without religion there wouldn't be any morals'.
Nothing is further from the truth.
Religion - a belief in a God, gods, or other supernatural, godly forces/beings. It usually involves faith without proof in the existence of God/gods, who usually, but not always, support morality.
Morality - a code of behavior that is built into human beings through upbringing. this code was slowly and unconsciously developed across the course of history, for the purpose of the survival and enbetterment of human society. (A society where everyone kills, rapes and cheats each other isn't likely to be a happy and productive society.)
The two are totally separate. Arguments such as
"If there's no God, you can just rape the next person down the street'
or
'If you're moral, you have some God in you'
are bogus, because morality is not dependent on the existence of religion.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
loinburger
|
|
Sweet Sauce Jones
Jul 1999
time: 00:16
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Ramo
Regarding the assertion that that morality is "inborn" into us, that flat out is invalid. What is "inborn" to us, is the drive to preserve our genetic codes. This drive has made rape, murder, etc. taboo within the human societies. |
Why do many people behave morally even when there is little to no chance that they would be punished? If the drive is only to preserve our genetic codes, then we would have no reason not to rape, murder, etc. if we felt that doing so would have a higher probability of benefitting us than harming us. Yet, many people still choose not to rape, murder, etc. even when the rewards outweigh the risks.
quote:
The concepts of "right" and "wrong" are nothing more than social constructs, ingrained into us from our childhoods, hence the disparities between the moral codes of different cultures. |
The differences in moral codes between different cultures are not very substantive; the differences are mostly differences in definitions, not differences in morality. If Pharoah is a god then it is reasonable that the same moral codes do not apply to him as to the commoners, but when the commoners realize that Pharoah is not a god then Pharoah is forced to accept reciprocity or he is deposed.
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
devilmunchkin
|
|
first circle of the inferno
Jul 2001
time: 05:16
|
|
LIKE THIS FABOBA...
MAN, THIS MAKES ME SOUND LIKE I'M YELLING.
anyway,
personally, i think morality is subjective and that's because i'm atheist. I think that what morals we do have are acquired in childhood from the influences around us, like our parents, school, and other person defining events that come up. THis would explain the growth of the christian church, because if people are fed this stuff (and i do realize that not every christian is fed this "stuff" from an early age) during childhood, there will always be that "seed" and inkling in them no matter how much they try and get away. THat influence will have been permanently planted.
this is my opinion.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
loinburger
|
|
Sweet Sauce Jones
Jul 1999
time: 00:16
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by devilmunchkin
personally, i think morality is subjective and that's because i'm atheist. I think that what morals we do have are acquired in childhood from the influences around us, like our parents, school, and other person defining events that come up. |
I too am an atheist, but I believe that morality is objective. This is because terms like "good" and "evil" are not simply subjective terms that we apply to those things that we like and do not like, respectively, but are instead defined in such a way that things are only "good" (in the moral sense) if they provide a particular sensation of righteousness while things are only "evil" (in the moral sense) if they provide a particular sensation of indignation. Some people feel that certain actions are more good or more evil than others, that is, there are disagreements over the exact delimitations of what is good and what is evil, but many of these disagreements can be settled on a factual basis when one person's opinion on what is good or evil is unjustified; for example, if I said something like "Billy is evil for enjoying tacos, for clearly chimichangas are superior," then my claim is unjustified because there is no rational explanation for why Billy's preference of tacos over chimichangas would instill me with feelings of indignation.
People are also restricted in their interpretations of morality because they must remain consistent with the moral codes that they apply to others or else they are demonstrably irrational. If I say "I may kill Billy but Billy may not kill me" then I must either justify the existence of such an inequitable moral code or else I am being irrational.
Influences like parents, school, etc. help to influence what beliefs we may hold on particular interpretations of what is good and evil, but do not change the underlying feelings of rightousness and indignation; these would exist even if we grew up apart from societal influences.
Blah blah blah. Long story short, Wiglaf is wrong.
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
devilmunchkin
|
|
first circle of the inferno
Jul 2001
time: 05:16
|
|
those gut feelings were produced by influenced in early childhood and animalian instinct.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Jack the Bodiless
|
 |
Converted underground reservoir tank.
Jan 1970
time: 05:16
|
|
Of course, there is no actual support for the notion of an innate "pull" towards the Christian God in particular.
It's Christian dogma, and stems directly from the Bible:
quote:
Romans 1:18-21 For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who hold the truth in unrighteousness; Because that which may be known of God is manifest in them; for God hath shewed it unto them. For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse: Because that, when they knew God, they glorified him not as God, neither were thankful; but became vain in their imaginations, and their foolish heart was darkened. |
It's a passage used frequently by fundies to deflect criticism of the unfairness of condemning to Hell those who were never taught Christianity: "God lets everyone know, so they have no excuse for not being Christians!" Similarly, atheists are in league with Satan (despite not actually believing in Satan), because we "know that God is real, but are in rebellion against him". Hence CivNation's rants directed at me: "You don't need proof, you must submit!".
Paul apparently felt the same way, following on with a classic fundie rant:
quote:
Romans 1:28-32 And even as they did not like to retain God in their knowledge, God gave them over to a reprobate mind, to do those things which are not convenient; Being filled with all unrighteousness, fornication, wickedness, covetousness, maliciousness; full of envy, murder, debate, deceit, malignity; whisperers, Backbiters, haters of God, despiteful, proud, boasters, inventors of evil things, disobedient to parents, Without understanding, covenantbreakers, without natural affection, implacable, unmerciful: Who knowing the judgment of God, that they which commit such things are worthy of death, not only do the same, but have pleasure in them that do them. |
Note the inclusion of "debate" as one of the terrible things that unbelievers do. Good Christians are supposed to accept whatever they're told without answering back. This is commonly known as "being narrow-minded". 
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Urban Ranger
|
|
Apolyton Duke of Off-Topic
|
|
Since Wiglaf has been ignoring my posts I need to find something to do elsewhere 
quote:
Originally posted by technophile
I too am an atheist, but I believe that morality is objective. |
Does that mean you think that morality exists independent of humans and/or societies? If so, what's the source of said moral code?
quote:
Originally posted by technophile
This is because terms like "good" and "evil" are not simply subjective terms that we apply to those things that we like and do not like, respectively, but are instead defined in such a way that things are only "good" (in the moral sense) if they provide a particular sensation of righteousness while things are only "evil" (in the moral sense) if they provide a particular sensation of indignation. |
I submit that this feelings are the results of socialisation.
We don't keep slaves now, in fact we see slavery is immoral. Ages ago though keeping slaves was seen as a normal thing.
Therefore morality evolves with the society it's associated with, and these "good" and "evil" feelings are drilled into our heads when we were kids.
Another way to look at it is this. There are certain deviant types who thrive on committing acts the average person considers as evil. This means that "good" and "evil" feelings that you associate with morality are not universal, even within any particular society.
quote:
Originally posted by technophile
People are also restricted in their interpretations of morality because they must remain consistent with the moral codes that they apply to others or else they are demonstrably irrational. If I say "I may kill Billy but Billy may not kill me" then I must either justify the existence of such an inequitable moral code or else I am being irrational. |
Not necessarily irrational. Hypocripsy will do fine as an explanation.
quote:
Originally posted by technophile
Influences like parents, school, etc. help to influence what beliefs we may hold on particular interpretations of what is good and evil, but do not change the underlying feelings of rightousness and indignation; these would exist even if we grew up apart from societal influences. |
This seems unlikely. For example some societies condone or even encourage the consumption of human flesh. There were also societies where human sacrifices to their gods were a common occurance.
|
|
| |
|
| |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:16.
Apolyton Time is 00:16. |
top of page
|
| archivepost |
|
Forum Rules:
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
|
HTML code is ON
vB code is ON
Smilies are ON
[IMG] code is ON
|
|
|
|
|
|
10-12-2001 05:21
ah yes, the good ol' religious debate. I haven't actually read this thread, so if what I say makes no sence what so ever, well there you go. 
|