Question for Atheists: about your view of the world

[Just_me_Mike]

If you were asked, and you are right now, do you feel the natural world or all that you know and experience operates on a fundamental that nothing is particularly fair. In other words the world is naturally an unjust place.

Could you please comment? Thanks...

 

[Wandered Off]

"Fair" and "unjust" are labels we personally superimpose. The universe is neither inherently, IMO.

 

[Just_me_Mike]

"Fair" and "unjust" are labels we personally superimpose. The universe is neither inherently, IMO.

So to you there is non real sense of justice.
When I consider that position, I cant help but think of Nazi values, and why we migt view them as inferior to our views if in fact we felt no real sense of justice.
Is that not a fair question?

 

[Revoltingest]

"Fair" and "unjust" are labels we personally superimpose. The universe is neither inherently, IMO.

What he said.

So to you there is non real sense of justice.
When I consider that position, I cant help but think of Nazi values, and why we migt view them as inferior to our views if in fact we felt no real sense of justice.
Is that not a fair question?

We see Nazis as wrong because we have different values from them.
We see our values as "better" solely because we see them that way.

 

[bobhikes]

I believe nature is completely fair. Fair in that it treats everyone the same(good and bad).

Just is dependent on your view and has nothing to do with nature.

 

[Just_me_Mike]

What he said.


We see Nazis as wrong because we have different values from them.
We see our values as "better" solely because we see them that way.

It seems once you declare "better" you also declare some standard by which you are comparing. What is that standard, by which your views become "better"?
Where did the standard come from?

 

[Just_me_Mike]

I believe nature is completely fair. Fair in that it treats everyone the same(good and bad).

Just is dependent on your view and has nothing to do with nature.

If justice has to do with an individual, what makes one nations agreed upon rules any better or worse then the next?
Do you never look at a nation and say, this one is better or worse than that one?
I suspect you don't if you really feel there is no real justice.

 

[Just_me_Mike]

Interesting... No further replies...

 

[Wandered Off]

If justice has to do with an individual, what makes one nations agreed upon rules any better or worse then the next?

We can have objective reasoning to support our own notion of justice, and that can be widely agreed upon - but it won't be universally agreed upon.

Do you never look at a nation and say, this one is better or worse than that one?

I make that judgment frequently.

I suspect you don't if you really feel there is no real justice.

Justice is real to me, and it turns out that some of the basics of my definition of justice coincide with that of others. For example, my definition says rape is unjust. That's pretty widely agreed upon, although it's obviously not universal. If enough of us have the same definition for a particular action, then a cultural norm arises. Cultural norms aren't always right, though. Slavery was a cultural norm for centuries. Culture changed, and its definition of justice changed along with it.

 

[Just_me_Mike]

We can have objective reasoning to support our own notion of justice, and that can be widely agreed upon - but it won't be universally agreed upon.
I make that judgment frequently.
Justice is real to me, and it turns out that some of the basics of my definition of justice coincide with that of others. For example, my definition says rape is unjust. That's pretty widely agreed upon, although it's obviously not universal. If enough of us have the same definition for a particular action, then a cultural norm arises. Cultural norms aren't always right, though. Slavery was a cultural norm for centuries. Culture changed, and its definition of justice changed along with it.

So you are appealing to your sense of justice as purely a learned and human convention/invention.
What I would ask you to consider is that one can take for granted that things learned must be human convention. Example, the multiplication table, it is certain we are taught this, but whether we are taught it or not does not make the table any truer or not. So in arithmetic we may get false sums, but we correct for it and progress. It is this progress that allow the multiplication table to be a standard by which we can compare our progress.
So to I admit we learn decent behavior from our parents, schools, books etc... This must not mean that it can only be a human convention. If our morals can be said to improve over time or from nation to nation, we must have some standard by which to make this comparison, if not there is no difference in savage morals or decent morals.

What we find in your cultural example is that the moral law existed just as the multiplication table existed, we just were missing the mark and still do plenty of times, but we must ask which class the moral progression really belongs too, real truth or human convention.
So, have I not given a reason to wonder if indeed moral law or law of human decent may be a real thing?

 

[Revoltingest]

It seems once you declare "better" you also declare some standard by which you are comparing. What is that standard, by which your views become "better"?
Where did the standard come from?

The standard is mine....the result of genetics & environment, rather than some absolute moral truth.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

So to you there is non real sense of justice.
When I consider that position, I cant help but think of Nazi values, and why we migt view them as inferior to our views if in fact we felt no real sense of justice.
Is that not a fair question?

I don't think it is.

I fail to see why "not universal" is somehow supposed to imply "not important" or "not real".

 

[Father Heathen]

If you were asked, and you are right now, do you feel the natural world or all that you know and experience operates on a fundamental that nothing is particularly fair. In other words the world is naturally an unjust place.

Could you please comment? Thanks...

Humans must make their own justice.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

Something I was wondering about: why did you direct this thread specifically to atheists? Is belief in God relevant to the question of whether universal morality/justice exists?

Since, IMO, God cannot be the source of morality, I'm not sure how belief has any bearing on the matter.

 

[Father Heathen]

So to you there is non real sense of justice.
When I consider that position, I cant help but think of Nazi values, and why we migt view them as inferior to our views if in fact we felt no real sense of justice.
Is that not a fair question?

Some ideas and values are indeed superior to others when you weigh the consequences. And I thought this question was about the natural world. Justice is a human concept and social construct.

 

[Father Heathen]

It seems once you declare "better" you also declare some standard by which you are comparing. What is that standard, by which your views become "better"?
Where did the standard come from?

For me, logic and compassion.

 

[Father Heathen]

Interesting... No further replies...

Well pat yourself on the back and give god a high five.

 

[Father Heathen]

If justice has to do with an individual, what makes one nations agreed upon rules any better or worse then the next?

How their rules most benefit all of their citizens and how their standards compare when it comes to rights, freedom and equality.

 

[Just_me_Mike]

The standard is mine....the result of genetics & environment, rather than some absolute moral truth.

Stating the standard is yours, means what? A standard exists outside of the things in question. If we are discussing human decency and justice, what does it mean to say it is mine? That makes no sense.
If you are suggesting you make you own up as you go along, I doubt you seriously believe that. If you do please correct me. In other words, I don't think when you see a girl drowning and a rope is on shore, that it is something "you" invented to consider throwing the rope out.

 

[England my lionheart]

If you were asked, and you are right now, do you feel the natural world or all that you know and experience operates on a fundamental that nothing is particularly fair. In other words the world is naturally an unjust place.

Could you please comment? Thanks...

Not at all,for example i am having a bumper harvest of Apples,Tomatoes,Courgettes etc but someone else gets zilch,the natural world is just a matter of instances IMO