FRDB Archives

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.


Go Back   FRDB Archives > Philosophy & Religious Studies > Moral Foundations & Principles
Welcome, Peter Kirby.
You last visited: Yesterday at 03:12 PM

 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 01-12-2006, 07:46 PM   #11
Honorary Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: In the fog of San Francisco
Posts: 12,631
Default

They always leave out the part about how we are pillaging 24/7. Pillaging is the best part of having no moral compass.

Granted, we do have to take a break from pillaging to do the mandatory murder and rape scene, but I just rush through them so I can get back to pillaging.

cheers,
Michael
The Other Michael is offline  
Old 01-12-2006, 08:44 PM   #12
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Mississippi
Posts: 5,047
Thumbs up

Quote:
Originally Posted by Autonemesis
It's true that there is "no logical morality to atheism." But it is false that "within an atheistic worldview amorality is the only consistent system." Many atheistic worldviews have consistent systems of morality, humanism is one of them.
This should be more concise, in my view, Autonemesis:

It's true that there is "no logical morality to atheism" just as there is "no logical morality to theism".

These words describe whether or not one believes in a God or God(s)ess(es)...nothing else is specified.

Atheistic worldviews have consistent systems of morality, humanism is one of them...buddhism another.

Theistic worldviews have consistent systems of morality, Christianity is one of them.

One, of course, this atheistic humanist does not agree with due to its stated and obvious conflicts with humane ideals.

Secondarily, to claim that atheists are only moral and ethical because they are inconsistent with their worldview is insulting, rude and blatantly incorrect.

This circuitous justification is only used as a prideful defense of their own system which is just as much a human generated moral construct as any other system.
Ronin is offline  
Old 01-12-2006, 10:09 PM   #13
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Amargosa Valley, NV
Posts: 2,486
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Autonemesis
It's true that there is "no logical morality to atheism." But it is false that "within an atheistic worldview amorality is the only consistent system." Many atheistic worldviews have consistent systems of morality, humanism is one of them.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but shouldn't you change "logical" to "objective"? While you can make a good argument that morality is subjective, I don't think you can get by claiming it is necessarily illogical.

I consider humanism to be a quite logical derivation of ethics from consistent principles. The debate would be whether those principles can be considered objective.
llanitedave is offline  
Old 01-12-2006, 10:57 PM   #14
MBS
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Seattle, WA
Posts: 789
Default

My first reaction to claims that following an atheistic world view to its logical conclusion leads to amorality is to point out that following a theistic world view to its logical conclusion leads to immorality. The god of the Judeo-Christian and Islamic faiths often commands its followers to commit acts that the vast majority of theists would consider immoral if they occurred in this day and age. What about stoning disobedient children, adulterers, and homosexuals? What about killing witches? The idea of religious freedom that is almost universally cherished (in word at least) by Christians and non-Christians alike is a totally alien idea to Judeo-Christian/Islamic god. In fact the so called “holy books�? often advise that apostates are to be killed.

If they want an example of a religion carried out to its logical conclusion, look no further than the Taliban. Look at the American witch trials, the Inquisitions, the Church's history of suppression of science, of freedom of thought. It’s amazing that, in light of current events, the irony of it all is totally lost on them. It’s especially odd that Christians can so easily point out the moral failings Mohammed or Allah yet fail to apply the same scrutiny to their own religious text. It seems to them that the teachings of Gospels completely negate all the nasty stuff condoned and often promoted by their beloved deity in the OT. Either that or they just choose to ignore it - thank the IPU for that.

Quote:
With or without religion, you would have good people doing good things and evil people doing evil things. But for good people to do evil things, that takes religion.

- Steven Weinberg
It is the theists who are inconsistent. The idea that all morality derives from a perfectly moral deity is vague and circular, at best. Actually, the texts themselves are so internally inconsistent on the moral views espoused by their deity that it is impossible to form a consistent moral system. It all comes down to a matter of personal interpretation. You would do a much better job by throwing the religious text out the window.

Quote:
A man's ethical behavior should be based effectually on sympathy, education, and social ties; no religious basis is necessary. Man would indeed be in a poor way if he had to be restrained by fear of punishment and hope of reward after death.

- Albert Einstein
MBS is offline  
Old 01-13-2006, 09:49 AM   #15
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: CA
Posts: 7,653
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Evolutionist
From This post From This thread.
Sounds like Jason really wants to kill people and is just waiting for his religion to give him the old :thumbs:
steamer is offline  
Old 01-13-2006, 10:23 AM   #16
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: London
Posts: 680
Default

OOH- I set off a whole thread on the matter!

Jeeze, you leave for a couple of hours, and look what happens...

Should Unbelievers Be Mass Murderers?

I like this quote from another mod:

Quote:
Originally Posted by MusicMan
I'm saying that we dont' have any examples of cultures (that I know of) being founded by atheists upon atheist ethics and morals. Cultural history is something that just doesn't go away.

The problem is that your parents were influences by the same Christian culture around them, and their parents. And their parents were influenced by the same Christian culture around them, and their parents, etc.
This Post
Evolutionist is offline  
Old 01-13-2006, 06:50 PM   #17
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Phoenix.
Posts: 5
Default

Perhaps they could explain the moral logic in anti aborition and pro capital punishment.

Easy. One involves murdering an innocent child, the other involves killing a bloody murderer. ;-)

Actually, I'm against both, sort of. I'm not against the death penalty per se, but I do oppose the unjust system that applies it; however, if someone murdered my mom, for example, and I knew who it was, I'd torture them to death... I seriously would.
MrPancho is offline  
Old 01-13-2006, 08:02 PM   #18
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Amargosa Valley, NV
Posts: 2,486
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by MrPancho
Perhaps they could explain the moral logic in anti aborition and pro capital punishment.

Easy. One involves murdering an innocent child, the other involves killing a bloody murderer. ;-)

Actually, I'm against both, sort of. I'm not against the death penalty per se, but I do oppose the unjust system that applies it; however, if someone murdered my mom, for example, and I knew who it was, I'd torture them to death... I seriously would.
Which is exactly why a truly moral system of justice takes the perogative of vengeance away from you.
llanitedave is offline  
Old 01-14-2006, 01:50 PM   #19
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Phoenix.
Posts: 5
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by llanitedave
Which is exactly why a truly moral system of justice takes the perogative of vengeance away from you.
Right.
MrPancho is offline  
Old 01-14-2006, 05:30 PM   #20
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: London
Posts: 680
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jason
Although it is true that people agree that causing pain is wrong, on what basis do you make that determination.

Are you suggesting that it is a basic axiom of moral reasoning ?

Where did this axiom come from ? How did it get there ? I agree it is obvious that this is the case, but that opens a can of worms for the Naturalist.
Love that guy, he's a hoot!
Evolutionist is offline  
 

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 08:16 PM.

Top

This custom BB emulates vBulletin® Version 3.8.2
Copyright ©2000 - 2015, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.