99Percent

I disagree.

Guilt is more than a religious fabrication, its a actual real emotion that exists outside any religion.

To deny guilt as an emotion is like denying pain as a feeling - we must face it and understand it rationally in order to be happy. We must understand where it comes from and why we feel it. Just as we understand why we must not touch a fiery iron we must understand why we have to avoid the actions that lead to guilt.

Longbow

You don't think that guilt was around long before god? Of course, I don't even think that god exists, but I do think that guilt exists. Or are you saying that a theist could not know that god did not create guilt?

galiel

No, I simply asked you how you knew that "religion didn't make up guilt, it was around long before god."

Arrowman

I agree. Let me put it this way:

Theists talk about morals - atheists talk about ethics.
Theists talk about sin - atheists talk about - well, "unethical acts", I suppose.
Thesists talk about guilt - atheists talk about remorse or perhaps regret.

I know that's a bit sloppy and a gross generalisation - e.g. atheists do talk about "morals" after all, and certainly atheists use the word "guilt" - but I put it that way to illustrate my point, in agreement with 99%.

Theists and atheists use different words and contexts to describe the same human emotions and concepts. It depends on whether you put on the spin that something is externally imposed and absolute (morals, sin, guilt) or personalised (ethics, "bad", remorse). Guilt is one of those.

AtlanticCitySlave

"No, I simply asked you how you knew that "religion didn't make up guilt, it was around long before god."

Because many animals, particularly ones who were around before humans even came onto the scene, express guilt at certain behaviors (i.e. non-human primates). 99Percent's obvious point was that many animals, including dogs, show guilt after doing particular actions.

galiel

Guilt, or fear?

Glory

Excellent point.

Glory