Which is a Better Foundation for Morality, Nature or Belief in God?

[linwood]

if we took our morality from nature, we'd have very little morality at all

animals live to breed and keep their territory....in the jungle its every animal for himself, only the strong survive. I cant see much morality in that lifestyle.

It`s a good day when you and I are in complete agreement on something Pegg.

 

[McBell]

if we took our morality from nature, we'd have very little morality at all

animals live to breed and keep their territory....in the jungle its every animal for himself, only the strong survive. I cant see much morality in that lifestyle.

Until you take a look at a wolf pack and how they interact with one another.
Until you take a look a group of Baboons and how they interact with one another.
Until you take a look at gorillas and how they interact with each other.

Actually, when you stop and actually look at some of the other species on this planet, you find that humans are one of the least moral and ethical species.

 

[Noaidi]

Until you take a look at a wolf pack and how they interact with one another.
Until you take a look a group of Baboons and how they interact with one another.
Until you take a look at gorillas and how they interact with each other.

Actually, when you stop and actually look at some of the other species on this planet, you find that humans are one of the least moral and ethical species.

Yes.
For a species which has developed a whole philosophy around the concept of morality, we're pretty crap at actually putting it into practice.

 

[Penumbra]

From what I can tell, the morality of gods is based off of the morality of nature anyway, so it all comes down to nature. There are several texts where I've read about a god and have seen how cultural it was, and how antiquated some of the morality is. If people build moral systems in their cultures and their religions, it's all leading back to nature.

if we took our morality from nature, we'd have very little morality at all

animals live to breed and keep their territory....in the jungle its every animal for himself, only the strong survive. I cant see much morality in that lifestyle.

This is a misunderstanding of nature and natural selection.

In nature, it's not every animal for itself. That's how some animals do it, but other animals do much better when they form social groups, and groups require a certain type of behavior to work. When it comes to these social animals, their "strength" comes mainly from their social bonds. If this type of social animal were to act in such a way to only care about itself, it would have a much lower survival rate than members of its species that work together.

 

[waitasec]

Until you take a look at a wolf pack and how they interact with one another.
Until you take a look a group of Baboons and how they interact with one another.
Until you take a look at gorillas and how they interact with each other.

Actually, when you stop and actually look at some of the other species on this planet, you find that humans are one of the least moral and ethical species.

excellent point...

 

[Pegg]

Do you see morality in "our lifestyle"?

When we stop behaving like animals, absolutely.

 

[Noaidi]

When we stop behaving like animals, absolutely.

How do you want us to behave, if not like animals? (you do realise that we are a species of animal, yes?)

 

[Pegg]

Until you take a look at a wolf pack and how they interact with one another.
Until you take a look a group of Baboons and how they interact with one another.
Until you take a look at gorillas and how they interact with each other.

Actually, when you stop and actually look at some of the other species on this planet, you find that humans are one of the least moral and ethical species.

wolf pack interactions consist of ferocious fights to the death among competing males... and when it comes to food, its the strongest who get to eat first.
Baboons are the same, males fight to the death for the right to mate with multiple females, Gorillas have a pecking order where the strongest get to eat the best food... none of that spells morals to me.

a moral animal is one who would put the interest of others first, would forgo its own comforts and needs to provide for the weaker members and it would never demand sex from its female members.... but that is not how any of the above animals behave.

 

[Pegg]

How do you want us to behave, if not like animals? (you do realise that we are a species of animal, yes?)

we are flesh and blood like animals, but we have a sense of morality... when we use our morality, its for the benefit of others. That is something animals will never have and its what sets us apart.

 

[Pegg]

It`s a good day when you and I are in complete agreement on something Pegg.

i agree

 

[Enoughie]

Belief in God is far better: nature provides only vague guidance, if any at all!

Luckily the Bible provides clear guidance. Like Deuteronomy 21:18-21, which commands us to stone disobedient children to death.

That's better than the natural values of honesty, generosity, equality, and freedom. Right?

Saying that nature doesn't provide any guidance for how to behave morally is like saying that physics doesn't provide guidance on how to construct buildings well.

____________________
Natural Philosophy of Life offers a simple, elegant, and powerful alternative to religious dogma. This philosophy has a firm foundation in nature, science, and reason, and it is centered on the core values of honesty, generosity, equality, and freedom

 

[waitasec]

wolf pack interactions consist of ferocious fights to the death among competing males... and when it comes to food, its the strongest who get to eat first.
Baboons are the same, males fight to the death for the right to mate with multiple females, Gorillas have a pecking order where the strongest get to eat the best food... none of that spells morals to me.

a moral animal is one who would put the interest of others first, would forgo its own comforts and needs to provide for the weaker members and it would never demand sex from its female members.... but that is not how any of the above animals behave.

let me ask you this, are animals vengeful...
meaning do they hold grudges...or do they kill for survival?
it is understood with predators...kill or be killed...and the same with prey, hide or be killed...if you were to compare our sense of survival to theirs it's like comparing apples and oranges...
animals reason differently then we do, because we don't understand their reasoning does that make us superior to them?

also consider this...

Experiments with rhesus monkeys would prove that the evolution of empathy is a very long one. These little monkeys were given the option of doubling their food source while simultaneously shocking their fellow monkeys, or eating half as much and letting their friends live an electricity-free existence. Using a system of chains, batteries, and automatic food dispensers, the experimenters found that two-thirds of the monkeys preferred the empathetic less-food option. In a few cases, these monkeys were even starving themselves to avoid hurting their little buddies. They were also less likely to shock another monkey if they had experienced a shock themselves, and were less likely to shock any monkey they knew, although they might not be so kind if one of the scientists were thrown into the cage.
Conservative Left Brain, Liberal Right Brain

 

[Noaidi]

[/QUOTE]

wolf pack interactions consist of ferocious fights to the death among competing males... and when it comes to food, its the strongest who get to eat first.

'Ferocious fights to the death' are rare. If they were a regular occurrence, the pack would disintgrate rapidly. In wolf packs, the dominant animal is respected and, yes, often feeds first, but not to the exclusion of others in the pack. Again, if this were the case, the pack would decrease in numbers. Also, if you observe females, they will regurgitate food to young away from the body of the pack, allowing pups to feed uninterrupted. This negates your claim of 'the strongest get to eat first'.

If you are interested in wolf behaviour, read anything by David Mech or Shaun Ellis.

 

[Noaidi]

we are flesh and blood like animals, but we have a sense of morality... when we use our morality, its for the benefit of others. That is something animals will never have and its what sets us apart.

A bold assertion. Can you back it up?

 

[Pegg]

let me ask you this, are animals vengeful...
meaning do they hold grudges...or do they kill for survival?

cats kill for the fun of it. Often they dont even eat what they have caught....im often rescuing mice, rats and birds from my cat, or i find a dead one perfectly in tact. And i feed him plenty, so he's not killing to survive.

animals reason differently then we do, because we don't understand their reasoning does that make us superior to them?

Yes, it makes me morally superior to my cat

Experiments with rhesus monkeys would prove that the evolution of empathy is a very long one. These little monkeys were given the option of doubling their food source while simultaneously shocking their fellow monkeys, or eating half as much and letting their friends live an electricity-free existence. Using a system of chains, batteries, and automatic food dispensers, the experimenters found that two-thirds of the monkeys preferred the empathetic less-food option. In a few cases, these monkeys were even starving themselves to avoid hurting their little buddies. They were also less likely to shock another monkey if they had experienced a shock themselves, and were less likely to shock any monkey they knew, although they might not be so kind if one of the scientists were thrown into the cage.
Conservative Left Brain, Liberal Right Brain

you just agreed that we dont understand how animals think.... perhaps the monkeys who have the choice to distribute the electic shock choose not to because they get scared by the noise their friends make when the button is pressed.

animals are very sensitive to sounds around them. In the wild, if a member of the group lets out a fearful cry, they all feel the same fear and will run even though they dont see the danger themselves...its a defense mechanism.

in a herd of horses, if one begins to run, they all begin to run... have you never noticed that if one bird in a large group takes to flight, they suddenly all take off.

 

[Father Heathen]

Superior ethics and morality are derived from reason and compassion.

 

[waitasec]

we are flesh and blood like animals, but we have a sense of morality... when we use our morality, its for the benefit of others. That is something animals will never have and its what sets us apart.

A bold assertion. Can you back it up?

opcorn:

 

[Pegg]

A bold assertion. Can you back it up?

there are so many examples i could give

animals are completely racist for a start. If you are not from their herd, they do not like you at all. See 'Meerkat Manor' for examples of how rival clans fight each other, steal each others houses & kill each others babies. Moral?

Or how about how male bears will kill the cubs of a female just so he can mate with her. While she has her cubs with her, she will not come into season. So male bears will stalk a female with its cubs and kill the cubs just so he can mate with her. Moral?

 

[Noaidi]

opcorn:

Make room for me. I've been dying to see this movie for ages!

 

[Pegg]

Superior ethics and morality are derived from reason and compassion.

thats exactly right

and animals have neither