FRDB Archives

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.


Go Back   FRDB Archives > Archives > IIDB ARCHIVE: 200X-2003, PD 2007 > IIDB Philosophical Forums (PRIOR TO JUN-2003)
Welcome, Peter Kirby.
You last visited: Yesterday at 05:55 AM

 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 01-08-2003, 10:48 AM   #11
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 2,842
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by notMichaelJackson
Personally, I agree with my friend that if there is no afterlife nothing matters because no matter what we do we will die.
I think that because there is no afterlife everything matters, because no matter what we do we will die.

I couldn't have said it better than dshimel:
Quote:
Morality is about treating people in a way that you would want to be treated, and they want to be treated, until they have done something to justify being treated otherwise. It has NOTHING to do with the existance of an afterlife. It has EVERYTHING to do with making this life the best we can.
Ab_Normal is offline  
Old 01-08-2003, 04:41 PM   #12
Banned
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Philadelphia, Pa
Posts: 461
Default

I think the great philosopher, Rodney King, summed up morality when he said,"Can't we all just get along.":banghead:

It's all so simple that way...isn't it?
usartist is offline  
Old 01-08-2003, 06:11 PM   #13
Regular Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: SoCal
Posts: 207
Default

I would like to ask anybody who believes that morality is contingent on belief in an afterlife a simple question: is the only reason that they, themselves, don’t walk around murdering people for fun or profit a fear of the consequences? Of course, if they answer yes, we might want to have them committed just in case they ever lose their faith.

I find it personally repugnant to hurt people. I feel guilt when I do so even inadvertently. I think this is true of most people (or at least I hope so). Maybe one could say that it is indeed fear of the consequences that keeps most of us from deliberately hurting people, fear of our own guilt. Anybody who restrains themselves from hurting others only out of fear of some external agent of punishment has no morals because they have no sense of guilt. I don’t doubt that such people exist. I don’t doubt that there are people who only keep their sadist impulses in check out of fear of hellfire, just like there are people who don’t keep such impulses in check at all. I find the existence of both kinds of people equally disturbing.
faustuz is offline  
Old 01-08-2003, 10:45 PM   #14
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Peoria, IL
Posts: 854
Talking

If I might open up a can of Calvinist worms... I know that many, many Christians aren't Calvinist, but it's the only Christian philosophy that makes any sense to me, probably because it was what I was raised with.

Is the afterlife a reward or punishment for moral behavior at all:

No. Salvation, the Bible says, comes through faith in salvation. We're all gonna burn, unless we "truly" admit we deserve infinite torture, and accept pardon.

Moral and immoral behavior would be reflected in Earthly rewards, and relatively better or worse treatment in heaven or hell. If you're a moral atheist, you might only get boiled in the molten sulphur lake, instead of getting beaten with your own bones while on the rack submurged in the sulphur lake. If you're a serial killer who converted on death row, you don't get a gold crown and your seat in the eternal choir is up in the nose-bleed section and they don't assign you the right music for your voice part.

As for Christian motivation against sin in an era absent obvious Earthly rewards (and this is the real kicker for Calvinists):

Anyone who would dare to commit a sin isn't truly saved, anyway... so you shouldn't sin so you can show off how saved you are. And they don't put sugar on their porridge, either!

And that, boys and girls, what it means to me to be a Christian.
Psycho Economist is offline  
Old 01-09-2003, 10:26 AM   #15
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: A middle aged body.
Posts: 3,459
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by notMichaelJackson
Actually, I would like comments on both. Personally, I agree with my friend that if there is no afterlife nothing matters because no matter what we do we will die. I don't think that people in general base their morality on the existance of God and an afterlife, but I would like to know what others think.
Gosh, that sounds so selfish to me. What about the children to come after us? I think a part of why we live moral lives is respect for those who will live here after we are gone. Do we want to leave them a decent place, or a shit hole?

How we act today sets the tone for the future, so even if we find no personal reason to act decent, the desire should still be there for the next generation.

If generations past were fully selfish, would they have bothered to invent the things we take advantage of today? Why strain yourself to make life better if all you have to do is wack Grog over the head and take his food and cave? Morals are a part of our nature to insure our survival as a species.
Puck is offline  
Old 01-09-2003, 03:15 PM   #16
Regular Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: City of Dis
Posts: 496
Default Re: Is morality determined by the existance of an afterlife?

Your first sentence:

Quote:
The existance of an afterlife is a major factor in my friend's life.]
Your next to last sentence:

Quote:
These were his explainations two years ago, and today he is pretty much a strong atheist with very few morals.
Is the first negated by the second here or does an afterlife (or the possibility of an afterlife) still factor into your friend's life?

Just a minor point of clarification.

Quote:
He tells everyone that if was 100% certain that God and an afterlife existed, he would not "sin" at all. He would not do "anything that would jeopardize his chance [at heaven]."
That's a lie. As every Christian knows "all have sinned" (and by extension, "all will continue to sin"). The matters of faith, forgiveness and grace cover the discrepancies of sin.

Perhaps it's better stated that "he would feel bad about sinning and seek forgiveness."

Quote:
At the other extreme, he tells everyone that if there is no God and no afterlife, he is "going to walk around slapping people." By this he means that he will live a completely amoral/immoral lifestyle and will have a nihilistic philosophy.
I'm not sure, but I think there's some fallacy in his 'logic' here. Maybe someone better at finding it can point it out. (Christian) Morality isn't only about eternal reward or punishment. There's also the component of doing good and right while one is still on the mortal coil. There are probably extremes to that philosophy; ie those who are only about heaven and hell and those more concerned about getting it right on earth - but I think many mainline Christian sects try to strike a balance between the two (never forgetting themselves that God is in charge).

If your friend truly thinks that morality is irrelevant here and now, then perhaps he should start slapping people as he sees fit. There are a number of ways it could turn out, and I don't think any of them involve him holding onto that senseless idea.

Quote:
Is his reasoning on the existance of and afterlife and morality right or wrong?
Yes and no. For many, an afterlife is part of the morality play so it is a factor; but you can see from some of the replies you've gotten already an afterlife doesn't have to be the driving force for morality.

In another thread, someone here wrote :"Morality should be based on respect for human life instead of fear of supernatural damnation."

That sums it up nicely. (Note: If you were that person, let me know. I need to attribute that quote.)
BrotherMan is offline  
Old 01-09-2003, 06:37 PM   #17
Regular Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: S Cal
Posts: 327
Default

i really liked Dshimel's reply. You can also check out some ideas about this at the American Humanist Association site and the Council for Secular Humanism as well as the library here. They have some great articles here. Being a Humanist (as I am) involves having morals, ethics, values and one can still be atheistic. AS I tell people, it's even more important, because we are all we have. Plus doing the expedient, selfish thing only works if you are the only one on the planet. If not, the only way to survive and acheive much is thru cooperation.
admice is offline  
Old 01-10-2003, 11:43 AM   #18
Banned
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Philadelphia, Pa
Posts: 461
Default Re: Re: Is morality determined by the existance of an afterlife?

Quote:
[i]Originally posted by BrotherMan That's a lie. As every Christian knows "all have sinned" (and by extension, "all will continue to sin"). The matters of faith, forgiveness and grace cover the discrepancies of sin.

Perhaps it's better stated that "he would feel bad about sinning and seek forgiveness."
I don't think so.

If people were absolutely sure there was a God, and an Afterlife, they would not fear death; and therefor yeild to being murdered.

And, carrying the idea further why do all the other sins?

I don't think it is that difficult to live a benevolent life. The theists leaders have insentive to make you believe that you can not...

They would be out of a job! I may sound niave, but think about it. let go of the idea that the World is messed up already, and consider it a perfect word, cause that is what it would be. If people were absolutely sure there was a God.
usartist is offline  
Old 01-15-2003, 07:52 AM   #19
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Sweden
Posts: 2,567
Default

Is he actually saying that an afterlife is his only reason not to slap people? Does he live in a bouble?

I would like to see him trying it out, surelly he can find some flaw in slapping people. Someone might slap him back, or worse.
Theli is offline  
Old 01-15-2003, 05:51 PM   #20
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Singapore
Posts: 3,956
Default

I believe morality had to do with fear of retribution and pride and dignity(not to mention rewards too). Above all, morality also set the basics for mutual trust between friends and relatives, husband and wife. It is hard to think that an immoral person will be well-liked by the publics if his or her deeds are well-known. Similarity, since almost no one wish to be alone or alienated from the society or friends that they know, most of us will try to live to the expectations(in terms of basic morality) of others around us.
Answerer is offline  
 

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 05:45 AM.

Top

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