Ethics and Morality - Page 4 - Talk About Marriage
Politics and Religion This is the place to discuss politics, morality, religion, and anything controversial.

User Tag List

 103Likes
Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Search this Thread
post #46 of 101 (permalink) Old 01-26-2017, 06:48 AM
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Posts: 110
Re: Ethics and Morality

Quote:
Originally Posted by VermisciousKnid View Post
There's no fact about morality that's based in science. There's no question about morality that's provably correct. Therefore questions of morality rely on opinions. That's an uncomfortable answer because opinions can be swayed easily. History has shown us that at any given point in time we believe that we know everything about morality, yet 100 years later we change that opinion. That proves that morality is relative.



I don't think so - instead, I think that your point can just as easily point to the idea that human understanding is limited. Your point proves that we just don't know so much about the world/universe.

old red is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #47 of 101 (permalink) Old 01-26-2017, 01:49 PM
Member
 
RandomDude's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 11,152
Re: Ethics and Morality

Morality of good and evil, right and wrong, absolutes in my opinion, do not exist. Everything is grey, and the shades are lighter or darker depending on your perspective. It's all relative.

Only rule of law I abide by is the law of action and consequence, and even that is not consistent, the true law of the world is that the strongest survive and thrive, nothing to do with morality, more to do with personal cunning and strength of will. Is it a world that I'm happy with? Corrupt self-serving individuals pollute the world but they are successful because of the true law of this world, morality exists merely as a social construct.

But as a social construct it keeps humanity in line. There's a reason why I have no need to look over my shoulder every minute and have to rip someone's head off on a regular basis. For the most part, the law enforces a much safer environment compared to one ruled by lawlessness. But is that always a good thing? As at the same time the falsehood of morality, leading to so much complacency from the masses has allowed me to succeed by remaining several steps ahead of my enemies, law-abiding or otherwise, my only restraint - is that I prefer to make decisions I can be proud of, a luxury that not everyone can afford, nor desire.

Many with my mindset, do not share my vision of a better humanity, that we have a responsibility to evolve our species. Many instead, simply use it to get ahead. In the end, a God we need, but he does not exist - in my opinion. I can only wish he does, but in the mean-time keeping the masses docile under the fear of the unknown, helps keep the peace, as false as it is.

"Si Dieu n'existait pas, il faudrait l'inventer" (If God did not exist, it would be necessary to invent him)
- Voltaire

Last edited by RandomDude; 01-26-2017 at 01:54 PM.
RandomDude is offline  
post #48 of 101 (permalink) Old 01-26-2017, 02:57 PM Thread Starter
Banned
 
Join Date: Oct 2015
Location: Rural Midwest
Posts: 3,275
Re: Ethics and Morality

Quote:
Originally Posted by 2ntnuf View Post
Son of a b....

You know? I really didn't try to give you a RC argument. I haven't been a real part of the church for many years. I think 20 or more. I was attempting to be as neutral as I could.

I actually was trying to tell you there is morality. It's based in beliefs. If you don't believe in a perfect being, you can't believe in morality. It's true none of us is perfectly moral. If we don't believe in perfect morality, how can we believe in moraity at all?

So, my conclusion was that none of us is moral for that reason.

One, those who don't have any beliefs can't be moral. They might use some other word, but it can't be morality.

Two, those who believe cannot be moral either, because only a perfect being can be moral. Those who believe can only aspire to those perfectly moral standards.


I think Married Dude gave a good example. Is it moral to go and kill, mame and destroy for a president? I think it's a job. Those who do it, I do not envy, but I am grateful for having to protect me and my country.

But, when have we been in jeopardy of losing our country to another power in a violent manner? I'm sure it's been around 75+ years. All the rest of the attempts that held any weight have been from within and/or in a nonviolent way.

Is it moral to destroy a country or someone with nonviolent means? I guess that's another thread?

Thanks for starting this thread. It has been interesting and thought provoking.
Lol, I actually agree with a lot of your post. I just thought that was an interesting similarity to the RCC’s position… Morality must come from a higher authority, not mere reason… men, although capable of doing moral things, are tainted by Original Sin (or the concept that they have a tendency to sin or otherwise do immoral things) and this, along with free will, means that we are bound to do wrong.

I’m glad you’re enjoying the thread. This is something I have a deep interest in, and it helps me to understand other commenters here on a much more fundamental level.

As to your questions and @MarriedDude's excellent points about the morality of war, of soldiery, of non-violent destruction… I’d say yes, they are inherently immoral, but because we don’t live in a perfect world, we will have to act, sometimes, in immoral ways, and pay the price of it. Prudence, and necessity, sometimes mean that our nature will trump morality.

Is it immoral to take a man’s life? Certainly. Is it always unjustified? That’s a lot murkier. Is it more immoral to let a murderer kill your children, and to flee, or to fight back, and potentially kill him? Because decisions never happen in a vacuum, we can find ourselves looking at decisions that are horrible, where there is no morally right option, only the least immoral option, or even merely the most expedient.

To me, there is something beautiful in the struggle to be moral, to try to do right, despite our nature and our impulses, despite what is easy and expedient. To know you will fail, but to charge that hill anyways, and to try to learn from those failings.
Kivlor is offline  
 
post #49 of 101 (permalink) Old 01-26-2017, 03:00 PM Thread Starter
Banned
 
Join Date: Oct 2015
Location: Rural Midwest
Posts: 3,275
Re: Ethics and Morality

Quote:
Originally Posted by old red View Post
[/B]

I don't think so - instead, I think that your point can just as easily point to the idea that human understanding is limited. Your point proves that we just don't know so much about the world/universe.
The idea that because we don't know everything there is to know about a given subject invalidates the existence of the subject is something that no one would extend to anything except morality. And it doesn't make sense to extend it to morality either, and reeks of intellectual laziness.
Kivlor is offline  
post #50 of 101 (permalink) Old 01-26-2017, 03:12 PM Thread Starter
Banned
 
Join Date: Oct 2015
Location: Rural Midwest
Posts: 3,275
Re: Ethics and Morality

Quote:
Originally Posted by tech-novelist View Post
Virtually every religion and philosophical system has a version of the Golden Rule. As Rabbi Hillel said (translated, of course): "If something is hateful to you, do not do it to another. That is the the whole of the law; the rest is commentary."

And as for the very important question of under what circumstances one can rightly use force against another, the answer is only in defense or to regain what was rightfully yours, not to gain something that was not yours originally. This is called the "Non-Aggression Principle", abbreviated NAP, and is the bedrock of libertarianism.

Of course, "merely" following the NAP doesn't make you a good person. You can be a real jerk whom no one wants to deal with voluntarily and still follow the NAP, but if you do follow it, then you are free to act as nastily as you wish without physical retaliation, in a libertarian society. You may have a lot of trouble getting things accomplished due to others' shunning you, but you will be free to live that way if you wish to. Most people don't want to be so limited in their interactions with others, so that acts as a brake on jerky behavior.
But why the NAP? Is it only because there is a general consensus of the "Golden Rule" across the vast majority of societies? Is it only right because it is popular?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Itwasjustafantasy View Post
Interesting debate. My husband, like me, is an atheist and yet is probably the most moral person there is.
I also know many theists that are quite moral but I do believe that atheists can indeed be the most moral/ethical people. Why? As atheists we strive to do good and to be good people not so that we earn some sort of reward in the form of eternal life nor because we fear some sort of punishment. We choose (and like me unfortunately at times fail repeatedly) to be good human beings because we are all born with the capacity of being good.
This might be more of a thread jack and I apologize for it but one of my pet peeves is the erroneous belief that atheists are incapable of being moral. I do admit I am not the best example but we all know prisions are filled with Muslisms, Jews, Christians etc who have committed horrible crimes and yet somehow is atheists that are look down on as if we lived to do harm. Also, we do not worhsip the devil, the devil is a mythical creature...I do not believe in any made up creature good or evil: no eastern bunny, tooth fairy, devil, etc etc.
As to morality of atheists, from where do you derive your morals?

It's not a complete T/J because I mentioned that if we took VK's comments as true, then atheists would be incapable of expressing morality, and that although they could behave morally, it would never be because it is right to do so, but due to mere taste (like a person who finds macaroni preferable to rigatoni)

Atheism faces serious questions regarding morality. And as to the "but there are bad Christians" comment, this "Tu Quoque" does not invalidate the question, or the position that atheists are incapable of morality if morality can only exist if there is a Higher Power. (keep in mind that I'm not saying that this is the case with morality, it was brought up by other commenters, and I'm exploring the concept)

Now, regarding how immoral Christians are vs how immoral Atheists are, I would like to posit a simple picture from an enjoyable little webcomic comparing the infamous INQUISITION and it's "horrible" persecutions, to the persecutions of a few Atheists who sought to make their Atheist Utopias... (Linked because the picture was so big it went off screen)
Kivlor is offline  
post #51 of 101 (permalink) Old 01-26-2017, 03:20 PM
Member
 
VermisciousKnid's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: New England
Posts: 1,984
Re: Ethics and Morality

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kivlor View Post
The idea that because we don't know everything there is to know about a given subject invalidates the existence of the subject is something that no one would extend to anything except morality. And it doesn't make sense to extend it to morality either, and reeks of intellectual laziness.

I don't follow your logic. It is a given that we can't know everything about anything. How do you translate that to denial of existence?
VermisciousKnid is offline  
post #52 of 101 (permalink) Old 01-26-2017, 03:41 PM Thread Starter
Banned
 
Join Date: Oct 2015
Location: Rural Midwest
Posts: 3,275
Re: Ethics and Morality

Quote:
Originally Posted by VermisciousKnid View Post
I don't follow your logic. It is a given that we can't know everything about anything. How do you translate that to denial of existence?
It was sarcasm. I should have used /sarc at the end of the statement. I have been clear that I believe in objective morality. I don't have an issue with not understanding things, and then using that lack of understanding as reason to claim those things are really just relative to whatever your taste is at the moment.

I think the reason you don't follow is that you aren't holding a logically consistent position long enough to try to gauge your own ideas, or mine.

Quote:
History has shown us that at any given point in time we believe that we know everything about morality, yet 100 years later we change that opinion. That proves that morality is relative.
Quote:
I made no statement about the equivalence of all moral positions.
Quote:
that proves morality is relative
Kivlor is offline  
post #53 of 101 (permalink) Old 01-26-2017, 03:48 PM Thread Starter
Banned
 
Join Date: Oct 2015
Location: Rural Midwest
Posts: 3,275
Re: Ethics and Morality

@VermisciousKnid

I want to go back to your claim that my argument earlier was an argument ad absurdum. It cannot be an absurd argument if I take you at your word, and we claim that all morals are relative. It can only be absurd if morality is indeed fixed and objective.

If all morals are relative, then depending on perspective / feelings / culture / upbringing / popularity etc, etc, then Charles Manson is good or bad, or something in between. Same with MLK Jr. If morals are relative, then there is no morally distinguishing between a family having a picnic, and what was done at Auschwitz. Because depending on who you are, and your tastes, then they are good or bad, or in between. There is no objective difference, merely your cultural / religious / preferential perspective, and your perspective is no better than anyone else's perspective. Because if it was better, then that would imply that moral good and bad do exist, and that morality is indeed fixed, not relative.

So, is it still your contention that morality is relative?
Kivlor is offline  
post #54 of 101 (permalink) Old 01-26-2017, 03:55 PM Thread Starter
Banned
 
Join Date: Oct 2015
Location: Rural Midwest
Posts: 3,275
Re: Ethics and Morality

Quote:
Originally Posted by RandomDude View Post
Morality of good and evil, right and wrong, absolutes in my opinion, do not exist. Everything is grey, and the shades are lighter or darker depending on your perspective. It's all relative.

Only rule of law I abide by is the law of action and consequence, and even that is not consistent, the true law of the world is that the strongest survive and thrive, nothing to do with morality, more to do with personal cunning and strength of will. Is it a world that I'm happy with? Corrupt self-serving individuals pollute the world but they are successful because of the true law of this world, morality exists merely as a social construct.

But as a social construct it keeps humanity in line. There's a reason why I have no need to look over my shoulder every minute and have to rip someone's head off on a regular basis. For the most part, the law enforces a much safer environment compared to one ruled by lawlessness. But is that always a good thing? As at the same time the falsehood of morality, leading to so much complacency from the masses has allowed me to succeed by remaining several steps ahead of my enemies, law-abiding or otherwise, my only restraint - is that I prefer to make decisions I can be proud of, a luxury that not everyone can afford, nor desire.

Many with my mindset, do not share my vision of a better humanity, that we have a responsibility to evolve our species. Many instead, simply use it to get ahead. In the end, a God we need, but he does not exist - in my opinion. I can only wish he does, but in the mean-time keeping the masses docile under the fear of the unknown, helps keep the peace, as false as it is.

"Si Dieu n'existait pas, il faudrait l'inventer" (If God did not exist, it would be necessary to invent him)
- Voltaire
I liked this post a lot RD, if indeed morality must come from a Higher Power (God) and if indeed there is no God, then we are far better off as a species and society believing in God (and morality) than we are in accepting Relativism. Because Relativism is really just a pretty way to mask Nihilism. And Nihilism, if acted upon is very, very bad for keeping people in line, and keeping societies cohesive and together.
Kivlor is offline  
post #55 of 101 (permalink) Old 01-26-2017, 05:21 PM
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2016
Posts: 104
Re: Ethics and Morality

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kivlor View Post
I liked this post a lot RD, if indeed morality must come from a Higher Power (God) and if indeed there is no God, then we are far better off as a species and society believing in God (and morality) than we are in accepting Relativism. Because Relativism is really just a pretty way to mask Nihilism. And Nihilism, if acted upon is very, very bad for keeping people in line, and keeping societies cohesive and together.
So a new problem woukd arise if we are to believe in a god...which one? I believe that men created god, not the other way around. Yes, to some believing in a god is indeed helpful. For example many prisoners turn to a god and decide to change their lives for the better and in the hopes that they will get rewarded with eternal life choose to do good. Fantastic. The rest of us can simply realize that hurting others is simply not good so there is that. But again, if the expectation of a reward or fear of punishment is what keeps some people in line then that is fair.
It is sad though to know that because we believe in a god that belongs to the particular religion we have being indoctrinated into (or born into, depending on how our parents choose to raise us) this may come into conflict with the other gods others believe in. We all know extreme or fundamentalist religious fanatics have done horrible things in the name of their chosen god. And I dare suggets that all such religious nuts were at some point just "good religious moral people" who have taken their belief system to an extreme where unless everyone else follows their doctrine they deserve to suffer or die.
I am not only an atheist, I am anti theist. And I am also a vegetarian and I have heard all kinds of arguments about how I should stop wasting time defending animals rights when there are more important issues for one to worry about. It puzzles me to know that some are incapable of considering that I can actually care about my fellow humans as much as I care about non-human animals. .sorry I went off topic yet again.
Excellent topic of dicussion though.

Itwasjustafantasy is offline  
post #56 of 101 (permalink) Old 01-26-2017, 05:39 PM Thread Starter
Banned
 
Join Date: Oct 2015
Location: Rural Midwest
Posts: 3,275
Re: Ethics and Morality

Quote:
Originally Posted by Itwasjustafantasy View Post
So a new problem woukd arise if we are to believe in a god...which one? I believe that men created god, not the other way around. Yes, to some believing in a god is indeed helpful. For example many prisoners turn to a god and decide to change their lives for the better and in the hopes that they will get rewarded with eternal life choose to do good. Fantastic. The rest of us can simply realize that hurting others is simply not good so there is that. But again, if the expectation of a reward or fear of punishment is what keeps some people in line then that is fair.
It is sad though to know that because we believe in a god that belongs to the particular religion we have being indoctrinated into (or born into, depending on how our parents choose to raise us) this may come into conflict with the other gods others believe in. We all know extreme or fundamentalist religious fanatics have done horrible things in the name of their chosen god. And I dare suggets that all such religious nuts were at some point just "good religious moral people" who have taken their belief system to an extreme where unless everyone else follows their doctrine they deserve to suffer or die.
I am not only an atheist, I am anti theist. And I am also a vegetarian and I have heard all kinds of arguments about how I should stop wasting time defending animals rights when there are more important issues for one to worry about. It puzzles me to know that some are incapable of considering that I can actually care about my fellow humans as much as I care about non-human animals. .sorry I went off topic yet again.
Excellent topic of dicussion though.
What makes hurting others "not good" morally?

Now, regarding anti-theism, why would you be opposed to something that you admit makes people behave more in line with morally good? Do a few bad actors make an entire religion bad, or do we judge the religion on the ideas the religion promotes? What do you propose as a replacement?

You didn't respond to the comic page I linked to... so I'll just go ahead and posit this directly (it did better IMO): As an anti-theist, how far are you willing to take your beliefs? Are you willing to die for them? Are you willing to kill for them? Would you hurt, hinder, or condemn in the name of Secular Progress? I ask because....

Torquemada (The Inquisition): 4,000 dead (over the course of 350+ years) (Catholicism)
Pol Pot: 2,000,000 dead (Atheism)
Stalin: 10,000,000+ dead (Atheism)
Mao Zedong: 20,000,000+ dead (Atheism)

As it turns out, Christianity was much less bloody in its entire history (in the name of enforcing Christianity), than Atheism was just in the 20th Century.... As it turns out, Christianity actually promotes some truly great morals, which cannot be said of Atheism... so wouldn't it be better to convert to Christianity (or Buddhism, or several other religions) than to remain an Atheist?

RE: Eating Animals... that is too far into the weeds. We should address that in another thread. I'm not opposed to the discussion, I'd be glad to have it, but that discussion would be completely dependent upon a lot of the answers I'm looking to have you provide here in this thread.
Kivlor is offline  
post #57 of 101 (permalink) Old 01-26-2017, 05:40 PM
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2016
Posts: 104
Re: Ethics and Morality

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kivlor View Post


As to morality of atheists, from where do you derive your morals?

It's not a complete T/J because I mentioned that if we took VK's comments as true, then atheists would be incapable of expressing morality, and that although they could behave morally, it would never be because it is right to do so, but due to mere taste (like a person who finds macaroni preferable to rigatoni)

Atheism faces serious questions regarding morality. And as to the "but there are bad Christians" comment, this "Tu Quoque" does not invalidate the question, or the position that atheists are incapable of morality if morality can only exist if there is a Higher Power. (keep in mind that I'm not saying that this is the case with morality, it was brought up by other commenters, and I'm exploring the concept)

Now, regarding how immoral Christians are vs how immoral Atheists are, I would like to posit a simple picture from an enjoyable little webcomic comparing the infamous INQUISITION and it's "horrible" persecutions, to the persecutions of a few Atheists who sought to make their Atheist Utopias... (Linked because the picture was so big it went off screen)
Where do I derive my morals? I was raised Catholic. I went to an all girls Catholic school and grew up in a Catholic country in South America. I never felt that thing called "faith," so i believe I have always been an atheist, I just did not realize it until I was well into my adult years.
To me it all comes down to empathy.(Those of you familiar with my story in CWI are probably rollong your eyes right now, fair enough, I am no model of morality). Unless one is born a sociopath, one can basically understand that our actions have consequences and they have effects on those around us. Why in the world would we want to purposely inflict pain on others? Why?
I am a very flawed person and yet my whole life I have strived to cause the least pain possible and the most joy possible to those around me. I have failed more than once but I'd like to think that if I ever treat someone with kindness they know that I do it because I genuinely want to and not because I want a reward for it.
I do not believe in the concept of eternal life and to be honest I really would not want that. I like the idea that this is the one precious life I get to be the best person I can be and thus I will do everything in my power to enjoy it and to ensure that I bring joy and kindness to those around me. No more, no less.
Although I am anti-religion, I am not anti-religious people. I get ot, I used to be one. If it brings one joy and peace and a way of staying moral, then I am glad religious people have found religion for such noble purposes. But I still think many would do just fine and be just as moral without believing in some diety.
Itwasjustafantasy is offline  
post #58 of 101 (permalink) Old 01-26-2017, 05:59 PM
Member
 
2ntnuf's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: PA
Posts: 13,989
Re: Ethics and Morality

Quote:
Originally Posted by Itwasjustafantasy View Post
Interesting debate. My husband, like me, is an atheist and yet is probably the most moral person there is.
I also know many theists that are quite moral but I do believe that atheists can indeed be the most moral/ethical people. Why? As atheists we strive to do good and to be good people not so that we earn some sort of reward in the form of eternal life nor because we fear some sort of punishment. We choose (and like me unfortunately at times fail repeatedly) to be good human beings because we are all born with the capacity of being good.
This might be more of a thread jack and I apologize for it but one of my pet peeves is the erroneous belief that atheists are incapable of being moral. I do admit I am not the best example but we all know prisions are filled with Muslisms, Jews, Christians etc who have committed horrible crimes and yet somehow is atheists that are look down on as if we lived to do harm. Also, we do not worhsip the devil, the devil is a mythical creature...I do not believe in any made up creature good or evil: no eastern bunny, tooth fairy, devil, etc etc.
You don't understand my point. I don't think. Morality is based in beliefs. Those beliefs are based in perfection. Since humans are fallible and make mistakes, who or what is perfect? I don't know what an atheist would say. I do know that when I think of perfection and beliefs, essential parts of morality, I personally think of a higher perfect being.

Atheists, or humanists, believe in themselves. As humans, we cannot be perfect. So, therefore the term moral is not a good word for atheists to use. It means nothing to them.

It does mean something to believers in some higher power or being, whatever.... This type of believer will have an example of perfection.

Atheists will say that is a dream or something, because they don't believe in a higher power or being.

I concluded, whether you are from a system of beliefs or an atheist, you cannot be moral. I drew this conclusion because, even as a believer who could use the term "moral", they cannot actually "be" moral, since that would describe perfection in morality with nothing done by them being immoral. That's simply impossible for any human.

Humanists believe in humanity and not a higher being or power. I'm not making an argument for or against being an atheist. I'm making an argument for or against the use of the term "moral". Humanists cannot be moral. They may not be moral since they do not believe in anything except imperfect humans. If we evolve, we are not perfect. We are constantly less than what is needed. So, we evolve.

It's therefore impossible to implicitly say any human is moral. It's also impossible for a true humanist to describe themselves or anyone else as moral or immoral.

I hope that helps you understand that it's not an attack on humanists or believers. It's all about the terms, "moral", and, "immoral".

"I'm significant!! Screamed the dust speck." - Bill Watterson

"And this, too, shall pass away."
2ntnuf is offline  
post #59 of 101 (permalink) Old 01-26-2017, 06:04 PM
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2016
Posts: 104
Re: Ethics and Morality

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kivlor View Post
What makes hurting others "not good" morally?

Now, regarding anti-theism, why would you be opposed to something that you admit makes people behave more in line with morally good? Do a few bad actors make an entire religion bad, or do we judge the religion on the ideas the religion promotes? What do you propose as a replacement?

You didn't respond to the comic page I linked to... so I'll just go ahead and posit this directly (it did better IMO): As an anti-theist, how far are you willing to take your beliefs? Are you willing to die for them? Are you willing to kill for them? Would you hurt, hinder, or condemn in the name of Secular Progress? I ask because....

Torquemada (The Inquisition): 4,000 dead (over the course of 350+ years) (Catholicism)
Pol Pot: 2,000,000 dead (Atheism)
Stalin: 10,000,000+ dead (Atheism)
Mao Zedong: 20,000,000+ dead (Atheism)

As it turns out, Christianity was much less bloody in its entire history, than Atheism was just in the 20th Century.... As it turns out, Christianity actually promotes some truly great morals, which cannot be said of Atheism... so wouldn't it be better to convert to Christianity (or Buddhism, or several other religions) than to remain an Atheist?

RE: Eating Animals... that is too far into the weeds. We should address that in another thread. I'm not opposed to the discussion, I'd be glad to have it, but that discussion would be completely dependent upon a lot of the answers I'm looking to have you provide here in this thread.
So, I am going to be honest and tell you that I am perhaps not the most educated person about historical facts about atheism. I just think it is fair to say that religion is not all harmless. That is all. I am also sure it has its postives but none i find useful in my personal life.
Being an atheist only means that I do not believe in a god, just like you probably as an adult do not believe in the tooth fairy or monsters under your bed. When it comes to morality, just by the mere fact that we are human we all, atheists included, may have failed at times to live up to some sort of moral code. I do not care to die for atheism (I will die eventually, why rush it?). I do not care for exterminating religious people. My anti-theism would be more in the form of making myself known as an atheist and refusing to indoctrinate my daughter into any particular religion. We live in an age where at least here in America being LGBTQ is becoming increasingly accepted as it very well should be and people are able to find support for coming out as their particular sexual identity. Only because I feel safe in an online forum do I talk about my atheism because it is one very important aspect of who I am. So what I do in real life is that I try to show through my actions that it is indeed possible to be a good moral kind hearted person "in spite of my atheism. " for example when I do a charitable act I often get the "god bless you." I simply smile and that is that. Other times I thank them and tell them that I do not believe in a god. They then give me the condescending "I will pray for you." In any event, I cannot get angry as I do understand that is what the majority of the population is, theist. I give to all charities but especially to secular ones. I love that most atheist aren't against women's rights and LGBTQ rights just because their "religion" tells them so.
Finally, I hate that I had been living a relatively moral life until the last year or so when I had an emotional affair. I hate that it damages the image I had of myself as a good, kind person. Yet this experince has helped me understand and perhaps be a bit more humble and open to and accepting of the need of religion for some people.
I think in the end we all strive to be good people. I intend to do so for the rest of my life without relying on religious faith.
Ugh...one of my biggest flaws, cannot be concise. I tried.
Itwasjustafantasy is offline  
post #60 of 101 (permalink) Old 01-26-2017, 06:09 PM
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2016
Posts: 104
Re: Ethics and Morality

Quote:
Originally Posted by 2ntnuf View Post
You don't understand my point. I don't think. Morality is based in beliefs. Those beliefs are based in perfection. Since humans are fallible and make mistakes, who or what is perfect? I don't know what an atheist would say. I do know that when I think of perfection and beliefs, essential parts of morality, I personally think of a higher perfect being.

Atheists, or humanists, believe in themselves. As humans, we cannot be perfect. So, therefore the term moral is not a good word for atheists to use. It means nothing to them.

It does mean something to believers in some higher power or being, whatever.... This type of believer will have an example of perfection.

Atheists will say that is a dream or something, because they don't believe in a higher power or being.

I concluded, whether you are from a system of beliefs or an atheist, you cannot be moral. I drew this conclusion because, even as a believer who could use the term "moral", they cannot actually "be" moral, since that would describe perfection in morality with nothing done by them being immoral. That's simply impossible for any human.

Humanists believe in humanity and not a higher being or power. I'm not making an argument for or against being an atheist. I'm making an argument for or against the use of the term "moral". Humanists cannot be moral. They may not be moral since they do not believe in anything except imperfect humans. If we evolve, we are not perfect. We are constantly less than what is needed. So, we evolve.

It's therefore impossible to implicitly say any human is moral. It's also impossible for a true humanist to describe themselves or anyone else as moral or immoral.

I hope that helps you understand that it's not an attack on humanists or believers. It's all about the terms, "moral", and, "immoral".
Well I just wrote an unnecessarily long reply...I get your position now. And I think I do agree with what you are saying...gotta stop taking everything so personally.
Itwasjustafantasy is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Reply

Quick Reply
Message:
Options

Register Now



In order to be able to post messages on Talk About Marriage, you must first register. Please enter your desired user name, your email address and other required details in the form below.

Important! Your username will be visible to the public next to anything you post and could show up in search engines like Google. If you are concerned about anonymity, PLEASE choose a username that will not be recognizable to anyone you know.

User Name:
Password
Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.

Password:


Confirm Password:
Email Address
Please enter a valid email address for yourself.

Email Address:
OR

Log-in









Human Verification

In order to verify that you are a human and not a spam bot, please enter the answer into the following box below based on the instructions contained in the graphic.



Thread Tools Search this Thread
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search



Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Why truth of cheating is better than not being told michzz Coping with Infidelity 158 03-23-2016 11:07 AM

Posting Rules  
You may post new threads
You may post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off

 
For the best viewing experience please update your browser to Google Chrome