Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 64 (9164 total)
4 online now:
Newest Member: ChatGPT
Post Volume: Total: 916,798 Year: 4,055/9,624 Month: 926/974 Week: 253/286 Day: 14/46 Hour: 0/2


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Morality without god
dwise1
Member
Posts: 5949
Joined: 05-02-2006
Member Rating: 5.2


Message 20 of 1221 (676881)
10-25-2012 3:08 PM
Reply to: Message 19 by Tempe 12ft Chicken
10-25-2012 1:36 PM


Re: Morality from the God Delusion
However, the fact that each individual [Christian] is able to take the lessons from the Bible and realize what should be kept and what should not be there (different for each group, of course) means that we are getting our morality not so much from the Bible (through God) as people are using the Bible and finding simply the good parts that are actually moral (or in some cases taking that which is immoral).
A rather important point to consider. Not having read that particular Dawkins book, I don't know whether that thought is his or yours, but good that you had brought it up.
How often do we hear "God's absolute morality" Christians denigrate non-Christians' morality, especially atheists', by challenging us with "You just arbitrarily choose what you want to be moral and immoral. What do you base your decisions on?" Well, as it turns out, they are also arbitrarily picking and choosing which parts of "God's absolute morality" they want to follow and which they want to ignore, the exact same thing that they love to denounce us as doing. OK, since they're doing it too, it is only fair for us to ask them what they based their decisions on -- obviously not the Bible. According you (and/or Dawkins), they're basing their decisions of what moral precepts to follow on the exact same thing that everybody else does. And I would agree.
BTW, one example of "God's absolute morality" that they wouldn't want to follow is requiring a rape victim to marry her rapist.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 19 by Tempe 12ft Chicken, posted 10-25-2012 1:36 PM Tempe 12ft Chicken has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 21 by Tempe 12ft Chicken, posted 10-25-2012 3:34 PM dwise1 has not replied

  
dwise1
Member
Posts: 5949
Joined: 05-02-2006
Member Rating: 5.2


(1)
Message 43 of 1221 (677135)
10-27-2012 5:31 AM
Reply to: Message 40 by Blue Jay
10-26-2012 11:44 PM


Re: My thoughts on losing religion
I'm offering my experience hoping that it might help you.
I became an atheist around the age of 12 or 13. I had been attending a mainstream Protestant church with our neighbors before that and chose to be baptized around the age of 11. About a year later, I decided I needed to starting taking this religion stuff seriously. Since we were supposed to believe what was in the Bible, I started reading it, from the beginning. I didn't even make it all the way through Genesis before I realized that I just simply couldn't believe any of what I was reading. And since I couldn't believe it, then I couldn't be a Christian, so I left peacefully. During high school I learned more of Christian history, which does not recommend that religion in the least. And early in college the "Jesus Freak" movement kicked in around 1970, which brought me in contact with fundamentalism, which strongly reinforced that I had made the right decision to leave Christianity. And then "creation science", which I started learning around 1981, was just icing on the cake.
So, as a young teenager right after I left the faith, I remember going through the thought process about morality and what to base it on. If I didn't believe in God, then it made no sense to use God as the basis. Fortunately, I had not been raised with an explicitly religious view of morality. I didn't learn until several years later that my father had left the faith because of the hypocrisy he saw; for his mother's sake, he continued to attend church until he turned 21. And while my mother was nominally Protestant, she didn't attend church.
So the moral training I was raised with was not overtly religious with arbitrary rules, but rather it was in the spirit of doing right by others, of courtesy, and of compassion. As a small child, I would open the door for others and continue to do so a half century later. Twice as an adolescent with fiercely bubbling hormones, married women to whom I was very much attracted basically offered themselves to me, but compassion for their husbands (one I knew, but the other I didn't) led me to decline their offers -- ironically, it turns out that my ex-wife had been cheating on me, so then so much for karma. In the discussion on this topic, some see fear as the main motivation for morality, whether that be fear of God's punishment of fear of the disapproval of others. Rather, I feel that compassion and empathy are much more important in morality.
Back to my thoughts while deciding what to base morality on. As a Boy Scout, I ended up choosing the Scout Oath and Scout Law. Yes, I was going through some eye-rolling at public religious pronouncements, but our troop leadership was based more on the Army model, so I didn't have too much of that to deal with. Later as a Scout leader myself, I learned that Lord Baden-Powell had pronounced the Scout Law to be superior to "thou shalt not" pronouncements (such as the Ten Commandments, though not explicitly named in that BSA magazine blurb) because "thou shalt" positive standards are superior to negatives. What I also did not learn until later is that Baden-Powell's Scout Law had only 7 points as opposed to BSA's 12 points and did not include a blatantly religious point, even though that religious point explicitly includes religious tolerance, which BSA does not practice (I was expelled from BSA for being an atheist, but only because BSA does not practice Scout Law nor its own published policies). But still, the positive values of Scout Oath and Scout Law were what I chose to aspire to.
In addition, I continued to think about morality. In 1985, I wrote down my thoughts, which I've posted here: AN EVOLUTIONARY BASIS FOR MORALITY. The thesis was that morality is the social lubricant that enables us to not only live with each other but also to be able to function together as a society.
So that is what I am offering to you. I hope that it is helpful.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 40 by Blue Jay, posted 10-26-2012 11:44 PM Blue Jay has not replied

  
dwise1
Member
Posts: 5949
Joined: 05-02-2006
Member Rating: 5.2


(1)
Message 256 of 1221 (681261)
11-23-2012 11:43 PM
Reply to: Message 254 by Phat
11-23-2012 11:21 PM


Re: Even sheep that think they walk independantly have a shepherd
Being led by the Shepherd.
You dont need to believe that the shepherd is leading you in order to be led by the shepherd. You simply have to do what you know internally is right. You may think its your conscience but it is His voice.
Fuck you. And the horse you rode in on.
Comparison of Mosaic Law and Hummurabi's Code, which predates Mosaic Code (AKA "Torah", AKA "The Law") shows that Mosaic Law was based on Hummurabi's Code, except that Hammurabi Code would err on the side of freedom and life where Mosaic Law would err on the side of slavery and death.
Hammurabi's Code was given to us by the Gods Bel and Anu. Therefore, those atheists who do the right thing "hear{ing} no voice" are really being led by Bel and Anu? Is that what you are saying? Because that's what you certainly appear to be saying!
You think it's YAHVEH's voice they're hearing? No, it's Bel and Anu's voices that they're hearing! At least centuries before anybody ever even heard of your freakin' YHVH!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 254 by Phat, posted 11-23-2012 11:21 PM Phat has seen this message but not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024