How can morality exist without god?

[Alceste]

I said that God or something very much like it is the only possible justification for a moral frame work. Morality without this is arbitrary and capricious. What you like has no bearing on what is true.

Your opinion as to the existence of God has no bearing on whether or not He exists. Maybe he doesn't! If that's true, your religious morality is even more arbitrary and capricious than that of an atheist, because you've only used one book, one philosophy, one set of arbitrary man-made rules from one single culture, whereas we can integrate the best features of every philosophy we learn about and discard the garbage. For example, what I've taken from Christianity is compassion for the meek, weak and poor, and love for my neighbours (which I interpret to mean "all sentient beings"). What I've discarded is everything else.

If you feel you must believe a potential falsehood in order to be a good person, I don't think there is any value or meaning in your judgment of what it means to be "good".

Isn't it more meaningful and virtuous to be "good" because your compassion for your fellow beings is genuine?

 

[Alceste]

So your are satisfied with an arbitrary morality based on nothing more than opinion. You have a lower threshold of intellectual satisfaction than I do. I require my actions to actually be correct not just accepted.

You too are satisfied with an arbitrary morality based on nothing more than opinion. You're just in denial about it. You need to lie to yourself to eliminate the possibility of self-doubt.

 

[Alceste]

While falling short of objective proof. There is more than enough evidence to adopt faith in God. Regardless it is not necessary to prove God exists to discuss the implications of his existence. You are right that his reality is the only question. The implications of his existence are unavoidable. The title of this thread does not require anyone to prove God exists. It requires the justification of morality without God. An impossible task.

You are satisfied to accept a highly questionable assertion on the thinnest of evidence, all of which can easily be proven false.

Some of us have higher standards of evidence.

 

[I.S.L.A.M617]

Lawlessness is quite liberating. It is good you do not feel you must justify your actions since you can't. However a little thinking and you will realize that moral codes at least in a non dictatorial society require justification. That is why Jefferson said God was the only source of our inalienable rights. It is also necessary to justify forcible action against another persons or nations moral actions. You have a simplistic inadequate view of moral development. No insufficiently justified moral code can provide justice. Your purposeful distortion of a Christians motivation for their faith reveals desperation caused by the lack of a dependable position and deserves no response.

It's necessary to justify your actions on legal grounds so you don't get arrested. This has no bearing on how bad you should feel about it. Morality and the law are two different things. My view of morality is simplistic because it IS that simple. Right and wrong is relative to the individual opinion. Religion tries to create a universal moral code that will keep us all docile and in check, but in the end it's all up to whether or not the individual wants to do something.

 

[mohammad_rayhan]

I wonder what would happen if 50 atheists survive a plane crash on a deserted island??

 

[Gjallarhorn]

I wonder what would happen if 50 atheists survive a plane crash on a deserted island??

Obviously they would rape each other and cannibalize the rest. That's what all godless heathens do, right?

 

[Alceste]

I wonder what would happen if 50 atheists survive a plane crash on a deserted island??

They'd skip the pointless task of praying for a miracle and get on with the more important business of finding water, shelter, food, and a way to signal for rescue, I imagine. No doubt they'd be either fed or rescued sooner than 50 theists.

 

[waitasec]

I wonder what would happen if 50 atheists survive a plane crash on a deserted island??

i think this is silly.

 

[I.S.L.A.M617]

They'd skip the pointless task of praying for a miracle and get on with the more important business of finding water, shelter, food, and a way to signal for rescue, I imagine. No doubt they'd be either fed or rescued sooner than 50 theists.

Couldn't have said it better...

 

[Sir Doom]

I wonder what would happen if 50 atheists survive a plane crash on a deserted island??

I assume they would group together and do their best to find food and shelter. Naturally, one or two would emerge as alphas and become defacto leaders of the group. Then as they explored out into the jungle they'd be beset by events equally as inexplicable as the original crash. Then they would struggle to reconcile these strange events for six seasons at the end of which they would find themselves at the funeral of a completely irrelevant character in a non-existent church. After some obscure dialogue they would realize their entire pointless struggle on the island was little more than a vast collection of red herring and the entire rest of the world would begin to hate J.J. Abrams with a passion.

Or am I thinking of something else...

 

[McBell]

I have answered this question a dozen time in a dozen ways so far. If they were not then they are unjustifiable, have no sufficient foundation, and are arbitrarily chosen.

Yes, you keep repeating this bold un-substantiated assertion as though it some sort of be all-end all answer.

The problem is that it is nothing more than a bold unsubstantiated claim.
It is an opinion not supported by facts.

 

[McBell]

The title of this thread does not require anyone to prove God exists.

If it is your claim that morality comes from god, then yes, you are required to show that god exists before you can tag morality on him.

If I was to claim that morality comes from an invisible pink dragon in my garage, then I would have to show that said dragon exists.

It requires the justification of morality without God. An impossible task.

It is only an "impossible task" to those who refuse to see that their god is not necessary.

What do you mean by "Justify morality"?
How does one "justify morality"?

And please, try to do so without all the bold un-substantiated claims of your favourite deity.

 

[McBell]

Lawlessness is quite liberating. It is good you do not feel you must justify your actions since you can't. However a little thinking and you will realize that moral codes at least in a non dictatorial society require justification. That is why Jefferson said God was the only source of our inalienable rights. It is also necessary to justify forcible action against another persons or nations moral actions. You have a simplistic inadequate view of moral development. No insufficiently justified moral code can provide justice. Your purposeful distortion of a Christians motivation for their faith reveals desperation caused by the lack of a dependable position and deserves no response.

Careful now...
Your blatant hypocrisy is starting to shine through.

 

[Alceste]

Yes, you keep repeating this bold un-substantiated assertion as though it some sort of be all-end all answer.

The problem is that it is nothing more than a bold unsubstantiated claim.
It is an opinion not supported by facts.

In fairness, he did list a bunch of falsehoods he believes to be factual in an effort to show his"evidence". I choose not to go there. It's a minefield. Stuff like "the Bible has perfect, accurate and detailed prophesies" and "the Bible has detailed scientific concepts that were not discovered until years later". Not a road I want to travel, since each individual falsehood would require it's own huge and tedious debate to disprove.

 

[idea]

"if a person doesn’t think that there is a God to be accountable to, then what’s the point of trying to modify your behavior to keep it within acceptable ranges?” - Jefferey Dahmer


http://listverse.com/2008/12/19/top-10-cases-of-human-cannibalism/

 

[McBell]

So your are satisfied with an arbitrary morality based on nothing more than opinion.

why not?
I mean, that is what you base your own arbitrary morality on, your opinion that god has anything to do with morality...

You have a lower threshold of intellectual satisfaction than I do.

Now you are merely letting your arrogance and ego shine through.
Your un-substantiated claims are only supported by more un-substantiated claims and your childish attempts to exempt your claims from scrutiny.

Your intellectual dishonesty is is not what is most interesting.
It is the pride you have in your intellectual dishonesty that is .

I require my actions to actually be correct not just accepted.

Yet another assertion by you that is not supported by anything other than un-substantated claims.

At you are consistent...

 

[Gjallarhorn]

"if a person doesn’t think that there is a God to be accountable to, then what’s the point of trying to modify your behavior to keep it within acceptable ranges?” - Jeffery Dahmer

Because, unlike most serial killers, people are born with empathy.

 

[Sir Doom]

"if a person doesn’t think that there is a God to be accountable to, then what’s the point of trying to modify your behavior to keep it within acceptable ranges?” - Jefferey Dahmer


http://listverse.com/2008/12/19/top-10-cases-of-human-cannibalism/

"Oh! Hello accountability! What's that broomstick for?" - Jeffery Dahmer

 

[Alceste]

"if a person doesn’t think that there is a God to be accountable to, then what’s the point of trying to modify your behavior to keep it within acceptable ranges?” - Jefferey Dahmer


http://listverse.com/2008/12/19/top-10-cases-of-human-cannibalism/

"I believe today that my conduct is in accordance with the will of the Almighty Creator."

- Adolf Hitler, Mein Kampf, Vol. 1 Chapter 2

 

[Sir Doom]

"I believe today that my conduct is in accordance with the will of the Almighty Creator."

- Adolf Hitler, Mein Kampf, Vol. 1 Chapter 2

An even better rebuttal!