Can Morality Exist Without God?

The fact is that morality preceeded religion and religion only codified pre-existing standards of behavior. That is why the morality embodied in many religions is similar. Some moral standards are dependent on the time and place where they were invented, such as the Jewish and Islamic prohibition against eating pigs.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

This is a fact is it?

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

I would say that not even mortality would exist without god.... let alone morality.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Yes. Is there a greater proportion of atheists in jails?

 

It does and I'll explain. All human judge each other, themselves, and events via two questions:

1) Are you, me, something else mean?
2) Are you, me, something else valuable.

This judgment process is genetic. It's how we evolved as a cooperative species. Having a good moral standard means these questions will be optimally applied in your daily interactions with other people and other people will find compatibility in those optimizations. Compatibility leads to resource sharing and trust, both of which improve your chances at survival and elongate your life.

I disagree. They tend to end up in jail or dead.

Yourself, other people, your resources, etc.

All forms. The cooperative behavior that solid moral standards encourage will help provide you with financial, physical, emotional, etc. security.

The sharing and cooperation resulting from solid moral standards grant you access you a higher diversity and quantity of resources.

Compare California to Darfur and I'll you'll be able to directly observe which soceity is dominant and the behavioral differences that maintain the dominance.

That's a possibility but I don't think it's a probability. Compare and contrast inner-city morality vs. upper-class morality in any major U.S. city.

I bet if you chose to murder and rape everyone you came in contact with, you would have alot of stress about those whom would torture and kill you in an act of revenge.

 

How does this make sense? Am I missing something?

 

This is theory is wrong(imo). The environment in which a child is brought up does play a role for a start AND genetics (So I agree with you in bit part), genetics is obviously pure theory but I believe it does play a role. Then you have the kids who seemingly have good parents but they themselves drink or overdose themselves to death at 18.

Most of the people who make it to the top of the ladder have stabbed a lot of people in the back to get there, survival of the fittest attitude.

And if you have no morals you don't get this?

Again, this can be achieved by someone without morals just the same.

As above.

I don't understand this comparison

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

The kids normally become spoilt brats who have no respect for people of a lower class, even if the lower class person has better morals. It's called snobbery.

I would personally, but there is a lot of cold blooded villains out there that seemingly have no conscience.

EDIT: Spelling mistakes

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

Are religious people better people? Do they commit crimes to a lesser degree than non-believers? No, statistics point out they do not. Therefore, religion doesn't make anyone more moral.

 

I asked if the above was a fact, in particular "The fact is that morality preceeded religion and religion only codified pre-existing standards of behavior."

You answered the above, which to me doesn't correlate with your first post.

Then you conclude with this. I don't disagree with your last two posts but I would like you to prove your first statement in your first post.

Tis all.

 

Oh, I'm sorry. We know for a fact that morality preceeded religion because moral codes are similar no matter what culture we talk about, so they are independent of religion. We can also observe that Apes have an innate moral sense.

We also observe that religions can overrule innate moral behavior such as the phenomenon of human sacrifice. It's not that they don't care about murder, it's seen as so significant a sacrifice to society that they offer it to a God for various reasons.

I would argue that organized religion encourages immorality, since it is based on following codes based on faith rather than reason or our innate moral sense. So religious people follow the letter of the law, but they miss the morality. For example, the people that kill abortion doctors, or the ones that hate gay people ostensibly for religious reasons.

 

No worries.

I was wondering about the above, it actually makes sense.

It's in the blood, and I guess environment.

So my answer to the OP is yes, now it can because it now exists.

Pretty obvious.

 

I've not read the rest of the thread so apologies if anything is repeated. To answer your question: Yes, certainly.

In any species there will be 'correct' conduct and 'incorrect' conduct. These relate to things that are either beneficial or detrimental to the individual organism or the species. If a tiger forgoes hunting meat and instead tries to survive on buttercups, he'll soon find himself non-existent. As far as a meat eating species go, eating meat is 'correct' conduct.

We, that's humans, are social primates. We - unlike many other animals including the majority of reptiles, depend entirely upon others for survival. We develop bonds and emotional attachments which is simply essential to our survival. If your mother does not develop such bonds, you'll probably find yourself dead and stuffed in a plastic bag. As far as our species goes, (along with other social creatures), we rely upon the group. This could be anything from needing someone to fix your boiler to someone to fix your sexual needs. Even the most reclusive of individuals, (if survival is an issue), needs others, (no - he can't typically impregnate himself or give himself a heart bypass).

Certain types of behaviour are essential to group and genetic survival. The same is true for any social organism - even ants. If an ant, for some bizarre reason, decided to work contrary to the needs of the group, he would be doing a great detriment to it or would find himself swiftly annihilated. In serving the benefit of the group he also finds himself serving his own.

Morality is another way with which to say 'correct' conduct or 'incorrect conduct' which is simply another way of saying beneficial and detrimental. You will find, in a social primate, that something detrimental to the group is typically equally detrimental to the individual.

Now, survival is paramount. Group survival is individual survival - and hence the existence of morality.

regards,

 

I like your way of thinking.

I think that what we considered evil sometimes is relative. To me slavery, war, taking advantage of the weak, making profit of other people, deceit, bullying is evil. Yet they are accepted or had been accepted by society at one point many peopple who consider themselves " good" or that others consider "good" people commit this kind of evil regularly.
This kind of "evil" is the most common and we are all more or less exposed to this every day. This evil is a consequence of our human primitiveness and is slowly disappearing from society as we evolve.

The other evil which is absolute like: murder, rape, is in general the exception
in a civilized society (most of them are at this time)
I believe these crimes do not play an important role on most people's lives unless they have been directly affected by them. Thosewho commit these acts are too primitive and usually end up in jail.

In other words, evil is only a symptom of our own primitivism, not comming from any god ( even if god really exists)

 

thank you very very much for the clear, conscice and easy to read and understand post..

that is like blaming the sun for how cold the antarctic is, you can see god's "goodness" as heat, and evil as cold, evil doesn't have to be created, as much as it is the absence of god.

that's also like blaming a hair dresser for all the people with messed up hair, what is it to him if he opened his shop and no one came?

he can go and force them to come and fix their hair, if he didn't, does that mean he couldn't? maybe, but it can also be his choice not to.

why would god do anything if he doesn't need anything? he is at the best state of matters, why change to otherwise?
why? i don't know.
but he says that he doesn't need our worship, it doesn't affect him one bit.

but,

who does it affect?
you and me, if god did it that way who are we to argue? why would you object in the first place? he created us even though he doesn't need us and told us to do things or else, i'd rather do, you'd rather ask why, and discover the "else"

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

know nothing of them being his chosen race.

silly limitations, your imagination needs a firmware update, go watch a pixar movie or some japanese anime.

which are none.

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

semi devine is haven, what about hell? semi what would that be?

and wait a sec, accepting those natural reasons? like that you are less significant than a bubble blown from a wand and will pop in a few seconds? let me see youu try accepting that.

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

humans need to broaden their horizons for what magic reality could be instead for what they want it to be.

 

It's impossible for morality to have anything to do with a god whatsoever.

Did he choose what's right and wrong randomly? If so, morality is obeying the arbitrary whims of a malevolent psycho.

Did he choose right and wrong because they are inherently good actions and bad actions? If so, then he wasn't needed. He's morally-aware, but we can be too. In fact, I'm much more morally-aware than the xian and islam gods. Their rules were atrocious.

Plato had this figured out 2,000+ years ago, btw.

 

Incorrect scifes:

”Is it not from the mouth of the Most High that good and evil come?”
(Lam. 3:38).

”For thus saith the Lord; as I have brought all this great evil upon this people, so will I bring upon them all the good that I have promised them” (Jer. 32:42).

”...shall there be evil in a city, and the Lord hath not done it?” (Amos 3:6).

"I form the light, and create darkness: I make peace, and create evil: I the LORD do all these things". (Is. 45:7)

The biblical fact is that your god created evil and is responsible for all evil that exists in the world. It is by his mouth that all evil comes. There will never be evil that god has not created.

Is this about the time where you abandon your own book as fiction? Let's wait and see...

 

ok, you got all this mixed up.
why can't god create morality, in which case the two cases you gave are one.

you can say he chose what's right and wrong "randomly" at first, before which there was not right and wrong, the concepts didn't exist.

then you say if he chose them because they're inherently so, as if they're fixed, and this shows your limited understanding of the concept of a god who can do anything, god abides no rules, he makes them, he makes them with no point of reference, he is the point of reference, meaning; as i said, when he randomly chose good and bad, there was no good and bad before, and if he wanted to reverse good and bad he'd reverse them and we won't notice, as we can't hold on to a concept he haven't created, meaning we can't judge him using a scale of right and wrong he haven't given us.

this is all from the core god property of being able to do anything.

any conflict in understanding how the concept of god can be is a conflict in the human mind, here, you miss some imagination.

not if god is who created morality, or just plain has more of it than you.
a difference in morality will affect judgments and outcomes, so just because you see morality different than how god does doesn't mean you have a better understanding, it's bound to be the opposite, my dear human.

so, what does that make him?
and i'm sure people answered him 2,000+ years ago, but as with all atheists, they turn a deaf ear to what they want.

first let me point out, i'm not a christian

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

yes, that mouth sprouted things full of good, and things with little or no good.
a room can have different temperatures at different points, some cold and some hot, they don't have to all balance each other.

the christian god who is sorry for doing some thing?

so?
the lord hath done it by not doing good there, hence evil.
why?
:shrug:
but it can be done.

uh, i'll just call this the rule of opposites.


now, all my replies to you so far have been empty and argumentive.
why? because i don't see a problem in god creating evil -if he did create it-, because without evil, there would be no good, without hell, what is haven? without threats, what are rewards? i guess that's what you can call the rule of opposites as i just named-although i'm sure someone came up with it before-.
simply, for one side of a concept to exist, you need the other side to exist too, it would be the non of the other, either the nonexistence of it, or the existence of it's opposite, they're actually two faces of the same coin.

how will good doers do good and deserve haven if all life was good and there was no evil?

how would the word justice have a meaning if there was no opposite to it? how would things like forgiveness exist? forgiveness of what, if not evil? how can truth, love, kindness exist?

then comes the more important question, why should they exist then? why did god create such good concepts who some will have to pay for the dark ugly side for? god can do anything, why didn't he create a world with only good morals, it makes no sense to us now but he could've created a world with sense which accepts that, so why not create a utopia?
the answer is in three points:
1-he is god, he asks the questions other have to answer and have to answer no questions others ask.

2-utopia exist, that is haven, some loony atheists say it can't exist because they judge it using our world's values and scales, so they say we will bore ourselves to death in it, forgetting:
a- god can eliminate the concept "boredom".
b-i don't mind living forever here on earth, i think i can always do something new, you can always conjure up some new possibilities, so why not haven?
and the same can be said to any concepts making haven not pure happiness.

3- and this is the most important, shucks man, that's how it is, there's good and evil in this world, the god who created it wanted it so and had it so, what're you gonna do?
-you can wail like some people on board crying on how unfair it is and how such a god doesn't deserve worship, and i won't even bother showing them how he deserves worship because even if he doesn't you don't have much choice.
-or you can accept reality like a grown up and try your best to take as much of good as you can, and bad? that'll be for those who choose it, like for example. when god tells us to worship him to go to haven, aren't those who worship the smart ones who chose good for themselves and will get it in the end? shouldn't everyone be smart like that and choose good? shouldn't evil disappear from the world when everyone does? i guess so, but reality says there are a lot of stupid people around to keep evil alive for a long long coming time.

god is unblamed for creating hell, if he gave you the means of avoiding it.
and there is no one to blame for not going to haven when god gave you the means of entering it, but yourself.

no bible

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

i don't mind.

maybe, by giving us free will to do it, which is also free will not to do it.

like i said, maybe, but he doesn't do it indiscriminately, he tells you where the roads lead and give you the wheel.
why are there roadS and not a road? we discussed that before.

 

or of course you can say god doesn't exist and rest your head from all this headache

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

well, temporarily..

actually maybe not even temporarily:scratchin:

 

scifes, you miss the point. If he created good and bad from within himself, these actions are arbitrary. There was nothing about them inherently that makes them good or bad. It's just a mean dude's whim.

If he recognized good and bad because of something inherent in them, then he isn't needed for morality.

So, either he chose randomly, which means there's no morality, or he recognized good and evil, which means he's not needed.

 

yup, that's him.
"mean" has been discussed in length, what're you gonna do about it?

that applies to us, as he wanted good and bad to seem to us, to recognize them as so.

just because something wasn't there once doesn't mean it isn't now.
also, god's will can be expressed as "randomly" by us, but there's more to it than that, more than we can know, and i'm no favor of calling it random.

that's not the case.