• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Difference in moral thought between atheists and believers

IndigoChild5559

Loving God and my neighbor as myself.
I will be referencing the points of the following article:

Research indicates that when it comes to morality, Atheists and the devoutly religion all tend to be very moral people. (It seems to be the nominally religious that tend to make excuses why something isn't wrong in their unique case). In both cases, fairness and helping the vulnerable play a dominant role.

However, the researchers found "differences between believers and disbelievers on the other three values: authority (respecting authority figures, such as police, parents and teachers), loyalty (being loyal to one's group, such as a country — not burning a country's flag, for instance) and sanctity (not doing anything perceived as degrading, usually in a sexual sense, such as being promiscuous)."

This seems to be related to the fact that believers are more concerned with group cohesion -- ethics that bind a community together. This is not the first time I have come across a study documenting this.

Another difference that has come up both in this study, and previous studies I have read is that Atheist morality tends to be more outcome based than rule based. Basically, atheists were more likely than believers to base their judgments about what is or isn't moral based on the consequences of their actions.

An example of this is the statistical differences in the two groups in their response to the classic trolley car problem.

For those who don't know what that is, imagine a trolley car going down the track, approaching a division in the track. If left to follow how the track is currently configured, the trolley car will hit and kill 5 people. However, if you pull a switch, it will switch tracks, and kill only one person. Do you pull the switch or do you just allow things to happen without intervention?

"In that situation, the disbelievers are more inclined to say 'flip [the] switch and kill the one person rather than five,' because they are assessing the relative harm," Ståhl told Live Science. "Whereas believers are more icky about that because they feel like they're actively killing someone, and they shouldn't kill. So, they are less comfortable with those calculations."

Now, just for fun, I am including the following video simply for levity. It shows a two year old's solution to the trolley car dilemma.

 
Last edited:

Tinkerpeach

Active Member
Well morality does not actually exist in the world, neither do ethics or values.

They are defined by society but remove society and you have nothing.

For instance, if there are only two people in the world and one says, “I am going to kill you”, and the other says, “ you can’t because it’s wrong”, what is he basing that off of?

There is no society with laws saying he cannot be killed, there is nothing written in the cosmos saying it’s wrong….nothing.

Atheists inherently have nothing to follow until they make it up. This is why we see their morality fluctuate all the time.

Believers have inherent morality which is consistent because it comes from God.
 

Quintessence

Consults with Trees
Staff member
Premium Member
Because... I dug into the demographics of the studies used for this. I was hoping for something more nuanced, but as expected, it's not representative of the global population so that's a very important caveat to understand in interpreting these data - it was only pulling a sample frame from the United States and Sweden... and basically just doing the usual "Christians vs. non-Christian atheist/none reactionaries" thing. I'd like a look at ... well... not Western culture, I guess? I'm tired of Western culture and I hate living it it... haha.
 

osgart

Nothing my eye, Something for sure
Empathy, and virtues are the basis of morality, not any God.

A God declaring right/wrong with no reason nor explanation of the morality commanded is a rather senseless morality. For example, a God commands people to commit genocide but says in His commandments 'Thou shall do no murder', is contradicting Himself and has no grounds for His actions, and furthermore doesn't ever explain His justifications. Why would that God have His subjects do that, when God's job is ideal judge of all? Makes no sense.

Morality is also based on reason and justification as well as empathy and virtue.

There's the matter of consequences and offensiveness. There's the matter of moral cause and effect.

God is God because God says so, is no moral basis, and no moral foundation at all.

Atheists have a solid basis far moreso than some of these religions if the atheist has natural empathy, and common sense values.

Morality is also based on trust and deserve which is the only way a worthwhile society is formed that provides any kind of quality of life. Trust and deserve is found in the virtues/values that people can appreciate if they so choose.

No one has the blind right to declare faith and God in their moral actions and then do anything they want without reason and justification because God says so in their minds.

I'm still atheist btw. There's no single umbrella for all atheists regarding morality.
 

Soandso

ᛋᛏᚨᚾᛞ ᛋᚢᚱᛖ
Believers have inherent morality which is consistent because it comes from God.

Different gods have different sets of different values for their adherents to follow. Moreover, different denominations of different people that follow the same god have differing sets of values as well. For instance, Catholics and Protestants have differing opinions on moral decrees given by the Pope. Not only that, but the hairs are split even more finely when you compare the moral systems of similar denominations. For example, German baptists vs. prosperity doctrine based churches which are both protestant, but their values are drastically different

When it all boils down to it, all sets of morals are subjective based on the group of people observing them whether they are religious or not in nature
 

Heyo

Veteran Member
"In that situation, the disbelievers are more inclined to say 'flip [the] switch and kill the one person rather than five,' because they are assessing the relative harm," Ståhl told Live Science. "Whereas believers are more icky about that because they feel like they're actively killing someone, and they shouldn't kill. So, they are less comfortable with those calculations."
I think I have to teach my fellow unbelievers a bit more about the trolley problem ...
 

IndigoChild5559

Loving God and my neighbor as myself.
I think I have to teach my fellow unbelievers a bit more about the trolley problem ...
LOL :) It is a classic among ethicists. Once you know the scenario, you will find that it is not uncommon for it to come up in sundry books and shows and lectures.

Have you ever watched comedy show, The Good Place? There is one episode where Chidi, a human ethicist, is having a conversation about the Trolley dilemma with Michael, the demon in charge of The Good Place (which is hell disguised as heaven). Here is the clip:

 

Heyo

Veteran Member
LOL :) It is a classic among ethicists. Once you know the scenario, you will find that it is not uncommon for it to come up in sundry books and shows and lectures.

Have you ever watched comedy show, The Good Place? There is one episode where Chidi, a human ethicist, is having a conversation about the Trolley dilemma with Michael, the demon in charge of The Good Place (which is hell disguised as heaven). Here is the clip:

I've seen it on YouTube before. I haven't watches "The Good Place", other than that except for some short snippets.

Everyone knows about the Trolley Problem, but few know about the "Fat Man" and the "Surgeon" iterations, which make the dilemma so much clearer.
 

IndigoChild5559

Loving God and my neighbor as myself.
I've seen it on YouTube before. I haven't watches "The Good Place", other than that except for some short snippets.

Everyone knows about the Trolley Problem, but few know about the "Fat Man" and the "Surgeon" iterations, which make the dilemma so much clearer.
Ah! I shall forthwith depart to Google and learn!

Later edit.

I actually had heard the fat man version before, but didn't remember the man being fat.

I had never heard the surgeon version before. Wild! Yeah, its pretty much a variation of the fat man version -- is the same act of sacrificing one to save five still morally right if you are actively involved in the death rather than passively involved?

Thanks for this. I very much enjoyed it :)
 
Last edited:

Tinkerpeach

Active Member
Different gods have different sets of different values for their adherents to follow. Moreover, different denominations of different people that follow the same god have differing sets of values as well. For instance, Catholics and Protestants have differing opinions on moral decrees given by the Pope. Not only that, but the hairs are split even more finely when you compare the moral systems of similar denominations. For example, German baptists vs. prosperity doctrine based churches which are both protestant, but their values are drastically different

When it all boils down to it, all sets of morals are subjective based on the group of people observing them whether they are religious or not in nature
You are missing the point.

A believer has morals, values, and ethics dictated to them by their God, whoever that may be.

Non-believers have nothing dictating morals to them until they get into a group and decide what the rules are.

I don’t steal because God forbids it, non-believers don’t steal because they’ve decided there would be a punishment for it. My morals will never change but a non-believer’s could if society changes their view.
 

oldbadger

Skanky Old Mongrel!
,......................

Believers have inherent morality which is consistent because it comes from God.
I don't think so.
For example, the Israelite's God's laws were simply there to produce a safe, secure, healthy, strong and cohesive community. ......for that particular time.

Do this for success, ignore any of it for failure.

And sadly the leaders kept getting them wrong, causing levels of failure.
 
Top