-
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!
Do Athiests have morals?
- Thread starter pro4life
- Start date
Moral codes and of course behavior may be individual, but morality must guide itself by social and other forms of collective impact. It can never be truly personal.
Draka
Wonder Woman
As I said, you develop your morals by your teachings, how you were raised, by your experiences throughout life, your ability to reason. They are personal, but the outside world has an impact on how they shape within you. No one can truly dictate another's morals though, as each person's ability to think and reason differ and how they interpret the world around them will differ and thus, their morals will differ as well.
Though, back to the OP, this all said, it then becomes pretty absurd to assume or even claim that atheists do not have morals, or anyone for that matter. Everyone has them, it's just our judgments of each others' that differ.
Though, back to the OP, this all said, it then becomes pretty absurd to assume or even claim that atheists do not have morals, or anyone for that matter. Everyone has them, it's just our judgments of each others' that differ.
Draka
Wonder Woman
"Expertise"? At morals? Yeah...no. Nope, uh uh. There are general judgments and consensus of right and wrong for society, but "moral expertise"? What the heck is such a thing? Who would claim such a thing and what makes a person so special as to claim it? Who would decide that person has it and what gives that person or people the right? Nope. Too many things in this world, the right and wrong of which, are subjective. I simply don't see how anyone can claim such a standing that they know better than anyone else the final say so on what those right and wrongs should be. Such a stance...pure narcissism.
JerryL
Well-Known Member
You are missing the point.
You've used words. I have not told you that your definitions are wrong. I have asked what your definitions are. I've done this for several different words at this point, and you've not provided any definitions.
We can use any you like, but without a definition to work from we will indeed be bogged down in semantics.
I don't know what you mean when you say "universal". I don't know what you mean when you say "well being". I've asked.
Jerry -
What parts of post #94 are confusing? As far as well being... would you say that a person who lives in a safe community, has a good job, and a healthy family probably has more "well being" than another person who is homeless, diseased, and starving? Would you say that a woman in Pakistan who gets raped and is afraid to report the rape is experiencing "well being"? Probably not. Perhaps the confusion here is that people don't tend to think of "well being" as being quantifiable. Is that your confusion?
What parts of post #94 are confusing? As far as well being... would you say that a person who lives in a safe community, has a good job, and a healthy family probably has more "well being" than another person who is homeless, diseased, and starving? Would you say that a woman in Pakistan who gets raped and is afraid to report the rape is experiencing "well being"? Probably not. Perhaps the confusion here is that people don't tend to think of "well being" as being quantifiable. Is that your confusion?
Cephus
Relentlessly Rational
Anyone can come up with their own morals and, in fact, lots of people do, regardless of their religious beliefs. However, morality is enforced on a societal level. It doesn't matter what morality you put in your head, it matters how society holds you accountable for your actions and your requirement to follow society's laws and moral dictates.
This is how HUMANS operate. Many theists simply don't understand that.
We all exist in the same world and our actions have consequences that quite transcend our personal perceptions.
That alone is enough to evidence that morality must be global.
Skill at predicting the possible paths of action in any given situation, their likely outcomes and the moral consequences.
It is an intellectual skill like any other. Most people will have some proficiency at it. Some will have a lot.
Real world testing, basically.
Are you sure? I think you will find out that very few actually are.
Not better than "anyone else", but better than most people, why not? We accept that for most other intellectual skills, after all. Morality has no reason to be any different.
That alone is enough to evidence that morality must be global.
Skill at predicting the possible paths of action in any given situation, their likely outcomes and the moral consequences.
It is an intellectual skill like any other. Most people will have some proficiency at it. Some will have a lot.
Real world testing, basically.
Are you sure? I think you will find out that very few actually are.
Not better than "anyone else", but better than most people, why not? We accept that for most other intellectual skills, after all. Morality has no reason to be any different.
Indeed. At times it almost looks like they believe atheists exist in a separate world and are somehow subject to different laws of nature and society.
JerryL
Well-Known Member
My confusion is how you define "well being". What is your definition.
I'm also confused as to how you define "universal" in the context in which you are using it in this thread. What is your definition of "universal"?
Cephus
Relentlessly Rational
Actually, I think it's exactly the opposite, many theists seem to think that it's theists who exist in a separate world and are somehow subject to different laws of nature and society. In reality, everyone gets their morality from the exact same place, most atheists acknowledge this, lots of theists don't have a clue.
Jerry,
I'd argue that "well being" like "good health" is tricky to define precisely. But like "good health" most people desire "well being". Characteristics of well being probably include: good health, personal safety, freedom of expression, food and shelter, friends and family, happiness.
On the flip side, the conditions of: disease, oppression, lack of freedom, hunger and loneliness contribute to a lack of well being.
But just because an idea doesn't have a precise definition, doesn't mean we don't pursue it. How would you define good health or nutrition?
As far as "universal" goes, I mean truths that transcend individual cultures, societies, or religions. For example, "not letting an otherwise healthy person starve" is an example of universal moral expertise. There have probably been aberrant cultures that have disagreed about starving people, but predominantly this is a universal moral idea: "feed the hungry".
I'd argue that "well being" like "good health" is tricky to define precisely. But like "good health" most people desire "well being". Characteristics of well being probably include: good health, personal safety, freedom of expression, food and shelter, friends and family, happiness.
On the flip side, the conditions of: disease, oppression, lack of freedom, hunger and loneliness contribute to a lack of well being.
But just because an idea doesn't have a precise definition, doesn't mean we don't pursue it. How would you define good health or nutrition?
As far as "universal" goes, I mean truths that transcend individual cultures, societies, or religions. For example, "not letting an otherwise healthy person starve" is an example of universal moral expertise. There have probably been aberrant cultures that have disagreed about starving people, but predominantly this is a universal moral idea: "feed the hungry".
TheDaoistScientist
New Member
I'm an atheist/daoist, and I think what is right, or wrong is based on the net happyness, or unhappyness the action creates. if you want to murder someone, then it is wrong, because your unhappyness is outweighed by the unhappyness of the person, and their loved ones.
TheDaoistScientist
New Member
I meant happyness is outweighed by the unhappyness.
SkepticThinker
Veteran Member
Of course.
Silly question?
Silly question?
SkepticThinker
Veteran Member
This^^
Guy Threepwood
Mighty Pirate
McBell
Unbound
Morality is global. everyone has morals.
What is not global is that everyone accepts the same set of morals.
Take the stand your ground laws for example.
Is it moral or immoral to stand your ground?
Is this to say that you believe most morals are objective?
And if so, at what level?
How would you measure this outside of appeal to popularity?
Renji
Well-Known Member
Who says that morality can only be derived from a holy book, religious teachings and stuff like that? Darwinian Theory also teaches one how to be morally upright (it's not as if it's some sort of a dogma, but it actually does). For instance, it makes us realize not to utilize the 'survival of the fittest' idea in fixing our politics. And yeah, can't the society dictate which actions are morally acceptable and which is not even without religious influence? I don't think that's impossible
Last edited: