Zone1 Morality is natural phenomenon.

[dblack]

... And not a mandate from your "god".



Cooperation and ethics evolved naturally. Because they promote survival.

 

[ding]

... And not a mandate from your "god".



Cooperation and ethics evolved naturally. Because they promote survival.

That's a different question. Sure it is. It is both a natural phenomenon that is independent of man and proceeds from God as God is every extant attribute of reality.

Arguing that morals increase cooperation and success, doesn't mean morals don't come from God. Yes, virtue does lead to cooperation and success. Successful behaviors naturally lead to success just as failed behaviors will naturally lead to failure. All regions teach this. It's kind of their main theme.

The real deciding factor is are morals and virtues absolute or are they relative. Atheists - at least most of them - will argue virtues and morals are relative. That they can be anything man wants them to be. Religious persons - at least most of them - will argue that virtues and morals are absolute.

Which way are you going to argue?

 

[dblack]

That's a different question.

A different question than what?

Sure it is. It is both a natural phenomenon ...

The argument, proposed elsewhere, is that atheists have no basis for morality. Are you now rejecting that claim? If so, that's appreciated.

 

[dblack]

It's long been accepted, without critique, that religion is the exclusive source of morality and ethics. This false presumption is used to insist that anyone not falling in line with the various religions, is innately immoral. This claim is utterly unsupported and merely a slur to browbeat people into accepting those religions.

 

[ding]

A different question than what?

What we were discussing before in the other thread.

Zone1 - Atheism Has No Basis for the Idea of Good or Evil, Just or Unjust

CS Lewis on his conversion to Christianity. He says in Mere Christianity: But how had I got this idea of just and unjust? A man does not call a line crooked unless he has some idea of a straight line. What was I comparing this universe with when I called it unjust? If the whole show was bad and...

www.usmessageboard.com

 

[dblack]

It's not bullshit and you recoil because you have never thought about it in these terms before. But these are the logical conclusions of atheism.

I don't blame you for recoiling at it because I would to.

I'm not casting aspersions. I am telling you like it is. Would you like for me to prove it by telling you how I see myself?

I'd like you to try.

Because I suspect you would use my arguments against me.

Only if they're bad arguments.

If I told you how I was more than just matter, that I have a soul and the spirit of God within me, you would be arguing I am only matter and that those beliefs were nothing more than electro chemical responses in my brain. Right?

Not at all. I'd likely reject your conception of "God", but we are not material beings. We are entities comprised of information - memories and thoughts and intricate patterns of judgement and perception.

If I told you how I could see how I was being pruned to become a better person than I was, you would tell me that's my imagination, right?

Not at all. Any belief system we commit to will prune us - if it's a good system, we'll be the better for it.

If I told you that my faith has turned on all the learning centers of my mind, you would tell me it wasn't real, right?

No. Faith is a valid way frame one's view of the world. But their are infinite versions of faith. That's what I find troublesome about modern Christians, at least those who presume to push others into believing as they do.

But I am telling you that I have traveled both paths and that I have never had so much peace, happiness and prosperity in my entire life. I've tested both paths. You haven't.

Actually, I have. And I have never had so much peace, happiness and prosperity in my entire life. I've tested both paths, and I'm happy with the one I'm on. I just get peeved by people who want to condemn me for that.

 

[ding]

The argument, proposed elsewhere, is that atheists have no basis for morality. Are you now rejecting that claim? If so, that's appreciated.

I told you already. Atheism proceeds in almost all its manifestations from the assumption that the basic principles guiding the life of an individual and of mankind in general do not go beyond the satisfaction of material needs or primitive instincts. Atheism sees no distinction between good and evil, no morality or any other kind of value except pain and pleasure which is a function of their satisfying their material needs and primitive instincts. So it's not that they have no basis for morality as much as it is they have no need for morality. If it feels good, do it. If it doesn't, don't. No obligations or duty to their creator. Atheists don't have morals as much as they have preferences. To an atheist morals can be anything man says they are. Atheists are OK with morals changing because they don't consider morals to be universal or independent of man.

 

[ding]

It's long been accepted, without critique, that religion is the exclusive source of morality and ethics. This false presumption is used to insist that anyone not falling in line with the various religions, is innately immoral. This claim is utterly unsupported and merely a slur to browbeat people into accepting those religions.

Not by me it hasn't been accepted. The Natural Law, aka Law of Nature, aka the Law of Right and Wrong, aka the Moral Law, etc. is innate. Everyone possess it. It's the reason mankind won't abandon the concept of fairness. Even when he violates it. It's probably the main reason I started questioning myself 20 years ago.

 

[MarathonMike]

It's long been accepted, without critique, that religion is the exclusive source of morality and ethics. This false presumption is used to insist that anyone not falling in line with the various religions, is innately immoral. This claim is utterly unsupported and merely a slur to browbeat people into accepting those religions.

Agreed. Show me a church full of religious folks and I'll show you a mixed bag of very virtuous people down to some real scum. Same result with a bar full of random people.

 

[dblack]

I told you already. Atheism proceeds in almost all its manifestations from the assumption that the basic principles guiding the life of an individual and of mankind in general do not go beyond the satisfaction of material needs or primitive instincts.

Atheism sees no distinction between good and evil, no morality or any other kind of value except pain and pleasure which is a function of their satisfying their material needs and primitive instincts. So it's not that they have no basis for morality as much as it is they have no need for morality. If it feels good, do it. If it doesn't, don't. No obligations or duty to their creator. Atheists don't have morals as much as they have preferences. To an atheist morals can be anything man says they are. Atheists are OK with morals changing because they don't consider morals to be universal or independent of man.

This just isn't true. I hate to simply reply, "no, you're wrong", but you are. Atheism just denies the traditional concept of a "god". That's it. You're piling a bunch of other presumptions in on it, in some kind of package deal, that aren't valid extrapolations of atheism. Atheists aren't driven by "material needs and primitive instincts" any more than Christians are.

 

[ding]

This just isn't true. I hate to simply reply, "no, you're wrong", but you are. Atheism just denies the traditional concept of a "god". That's it. You're piling a bunch of other presumptions in on it, in some kind of package deal, that aren't valid extrapolations of atheism. Atheists aren't driven by "material needs and primitive instincts" any more than Christians are.

No offense but I'm not really seeing any logic here. You'd like to think your atheism is only limited to one single narrow belief but I say it affects every part of your being. Specifically how you view religion in general and Christianity specifically. Same goes for how you see Christians. From what I can see you have a pretty poor opinion of both.

 

[dblack]

No offense but I'm not really seeing any logic here. You'd like to think your atheism is only limited to one single narrow belief but I say it affects every part of your being. Specifically how you view religion in general and Christianity specifically. Same goes for how you see Christians. From what I can see you have a pretty poor opinion of both.

Then you're not seeing clearly. I don't have a problem with religious people, nor Christians. I just push back against people who start condemning those of us who don't follow their religion.

 

[ding]

Then you're not seeing clearly. I don't have a problem with religious people, nor Christians. I just push back against people who start condemning those of us who don't follow their religion.

 

[dblack]

Zone1 - Atheism Has No Basis for the Idea of Good or Evil, Just or Unjust

CS Lewis on his conversion to Christianity. He says in Mere Christianity: But how had I got this idea of just and unjust? A man does not call a line crooked unless he has some idea of a straight line. What was I comparing this universe with when I called it unjust? If the whole show was bad and...

www.usmessageboard.com

 

[Votto]

... And not a mandate from your "god".



Cooperation and ethics evolved naturally. Because they promote survival.

Genocide historically is so common, it should be seen more as human nature than an anomaly, and you want me to believe morality comes about naturally?

 

[zaangalewa]

... And not a mandate from your "god".



Cooperation and ethics evolved naturally. Because they promote survival.

If an alpha wolve is ready to die for another wolve this promotes survival? (By the way: So called human "alpha wolves" normally don't do so!)

 

[zaangalewa]

Morality is natural phenomenon.​

... And not a mandate from your "god".

We say "God is logos" or "God is love" or "God is life" and so on but never "God is moral".

 

[zaangalewa]

... Cooperation and ethics evolved naturally. ...

When human beings cooperate - for example for to build a car or a sky scraper - and/or act morally - for example because they collect money for a project to help others - then this has nothing to do with evolution. Reason: This behavior is intentionally and planful (=teleologically). Evolution is not teleologically nor has evolution intentions (also "degeneration" is evolution). So what do you really compare?

 

[zaangalewa]

...

This video is about game theory - a very special mathematical subject. I know not any animal in the world which communicates about mathematics with each other or with human beings - aslthough some animals - for example ravens - have a better intuituive understanding of numbers and individuality. The knowledge in mathematics grows because of research and intuition - but not because of evolution.

 

[JustAGuy1]

... And not a mandate from your "god".



Cooperation and ethics evolved naturally. Because they promote survival.

Whose "Morality"?