Describe an Atheist Moral Code
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
04-04-2016, 03:26 PM
RE: Describe an Atheist Moral Code
I am appaled about how and why particularly theists, whom of all people are sitting on high horses about morale all day long, come to this forum and do nothing but lying their asses off. Being it Q, CotW or this one.

It just shows how serious they take their oh so professed beliefs, which amongst other stuff tell them not to lie at all.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like Deesse23's post
04-04-2016, 03:32 PM
RE: Describe an Atheist Moral Code
(04-04-2016 10:59 AM)Tomasia Wrote:  Subjective morality doesn't describe the moral views of society.
Correct, it doesn't. Society doesn't have moral beliefs. There is no authority (or spokesman) with regards to the morality of society. No documented morals, no source that can be refered to in case of a dispute.
There are a wide variety of moral beliefs held by each individual, not society.
(04-04-2016 10:59 AM)Tomasia Wrote:  But let's assume that everyone has rethought their moral views, reinterpreted them all as subjective. Morality would just be a matter of what an individual believes should be labeled as morally good, and bad.
Yes, unless they have a person, organisation or book that they hold to as an authority. For example, many religious folk are taught (conditioned) not to trust their own judgement. They are taught to follow the direction of their "spiritual" leaders instead. For them, morality may seem somewhat arbitrary i.e. I don't do X because my leader tells me that X is immoral. They might not have any understanding as to why X might be considered immoral, but they belief it to be so because they delegate their thinking to their leaders adn don't bother themselves with such things.
For a person with this mindset they might be confused as to how other people (atheists) without moral leaders can decide that X is right or wrong. They might consider it to be a random choice, a whim, because they have no idea themselves how a person would go about working out if something is right or wrong. After all that is the domain of the gods, not the domain of flawed humans, right?

(04-04-2016 10:59 AM)Tomasia Wrote:  Perhaps in some instances he might be in agreement with what most of the people in his community think
If they perceive from their interactions within society, given their niche of friends and family, given their place of work, their tv shows they watch, they might perceive that society is in accordance with their own moral beliefs. After all they may consider themselves to be a product of society (a norm amongst their peers), ingrained into this way of thinking with most of their interactions from birth onwards.
(04-04-2016 10:59 AM)Tomasia Wrote:  , perhaps not. Perhaps he thinks something is bad, while others thinks it' good.
Yes, well they don't tend to think X is moral in my society but I don't like X.
Morality always reflects the beliefs of the individual, not the beliefs of society.
If, for example, prostitution is legal and the majority of people think it is an occupation rather than a moral or immoral act, But Jude thinks prostitution is immoral then Jude will not say that prostitution is moral because in my society it is moral. Jude will be of the opinion that prostitution is immoral despite what others think.
(04-04-2016 10:59 AM)Tomasia Wrote:  Since morality is not objective, there's no factual or objective basis to claim he is wrong for disagreeing with society here, anymore so than if he liked Justin Bieber, while the rest of community didn't. They might look at him a bit weird, but thats about it.
Yes. That's correct.
But of course the moral language is like a very thick fog. It hides all the underlying detail.
When Jude says that X is immoral, it isn't because Jude has randomly decided between moral and immoral for that act. This isn't something that Jude is going to flip the coin and randomly re-decide after lunch and then perhaps randomly re-decide after dinner.
Jude has her own life experiences, own values, own emotions and she has decided, possibly based on a multitude of inputs and reasons (some conflicting) that her opinion is that X is immoral. This is the right answer for her, but not necessarily for others.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like Stevil's post
04-04-2016, 04:08 PM
RE: Describe an Atheist Moral Code
(04-04-2016 10:59 AM)Tomasia Wrote:  
(04-04-2016 10:41 AM)Chas Wrote:  Morality describes the ethics and mores of a society. How is that not useful?

Subjective morality doesn't describe the moral views of society.

Of course it does. It is the sum of people's subjective views.

Quote:But let's assume that everyone has rethought their moral views, reinterpreted them all as subjective. Morality would just be a matter of what an individual believes should be labeled as morally good, and bad. Perhaps in some instances he might be in agreement with what most of the people in his community think, perhaps not. Perhaps he thinks something is bad, while others thinks it' good.

Yes.

Quote:Since morality is not objective, there's no factual or objective basis to claim he is wrong for disagreeing with society here, anymore so than if he liked Justin Bieber, while the rest of community didn't. They might look at him a bit weird, but thats about it.

If someone's moral compass differs too much from society's he's judged criminal.

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 3 users Like Chas's post
04-04-2016, 04:28 PM
RE: Describe an Atheist Moral Code
(04-04-2016 04:08 PM)Chas Wrote:  
(04-04-2016 10:59 AM)Tomasia Wrote:  Subjective morality doesn't describe the moral views of society.

Of course it does. It is the sum of people's subjective views.

If most people subscribe to belief that morality is objective, if objective morality doesn't not exist, the sum of these people's belief wouldn't be subjective, they'd be false.

"Tell me, muse, of the storyteller who has been thrust to the edge of the world, both an infant and an ancient, and through him reveal everyman." ---Homer the aged poet.

"In Him was life, and the life was the Light of men. The Light shines in the darkness, and the darkness did not comprehend it."
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
04-04-2016, 04:31 PM (This post was last modified: 04-04-2016 04:35 PM by Tomasia.)
RE: Describe an Atheist Moral Code
(04-04-2016 04:08 PM)Chas Wrote:  If someone's moral compass differs too much from society's he's judged criminal.

Moral compass don't exist, they're just imaginary. Those who get caught breaking the law, and tried and convicted are labelled criminals.

Why not subscribe to a personal moral code, of what is good is what is beneficial to you? If you like it do it, if you don't, don't. If the benefit outweighs whatever personal cost, then go for it. Why try and place yourself under the authority of consensus opinion (society)?

Are there things you find beneficial to yourself that you avoid doing because you're afraid of societies subjective moral opinions here?

"Tell me, muse, of the storyteller who has been thrust to the edge of the world, both an infant and an ancient, and through him reveal everyman." ---Homer the aged poet.

"In Him was life, and the life was the Light of men. The Light shines in the darkness, and the darkness did not comprehend it."
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
04-04-2016, 04:34 PM
RE: Describe an Atheist Moral Code
(04-04-2016 04:28 PM)Tomasia Wrote:  
(04-04-2016 04:08 PM)Chas Wrote:  Of course it does. It is the sum of people's subjective views.

If most people subscribe to belief that morality is objective, if objective morality doesn't not exist, the sum of these people's belief wouldn't be subjective, they'd be false.

No. How many times need this be explained?

Society can't collectively make something true that isn't. It can't decide collectively that evolution is false and it be true.

But it can collectively create a subjective system with end members that are right/wrong.

You're equating apples and oranges, Poe.

Being nice is something stupid people do to hedge their bets
-Rick
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
04-04-2016, 04:35 PM
RE: Describe an Atheist Moral Code
(04-04-2016 04:28 PM)Tomasia Wrote:  
(04-04-2016 04:08 PM)Chas Wrote:  Of course it does. It is the sum of people's subjective views.

If most people subscribe to belief that morality is objective, if objective morality doesn't not exist, the sum of these people's belief wouldn't be subjective, they'd be false.

No, the sum of a number of subjective views doesn't magically become objective. Facepalm

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Chas's post
04-04-2016, 04:37 PM
RE: Describe an Atheist Moral Code
(04-04-2016 04:34 PM)TheBeardedDude Wrote:  No. How many times need this be explained?

Society can't collectively make something true that isn't. It can't decide collectively that evolution is false and it be true.

No, but they can collectively hold false beliefs. Those beliefs, don't become subjective when shown to be false though.

"Tell me, muse, of the storyteller who has been thrust to the edge of the world, both an infant and an ancient, and through him reveal everyman." ---Homer the aged poet.

"In Him was life, and the life was the Light of men. The Light shines in the darkness, and the darkness did not comprehend it."
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
04-04-2016, 04:37 PM
RE: Describe an Atheist Moral Code
(04-04-2016 04:31 PM)Tomasia Wrote:  
(04-04-2016 04:08 PM)Chas Wrote:  If someone's moral compass differs too much from society's he's judged criminal.

Moral compass don't exist, they're just imaginary. Those who get caught breaking the law, and tried and convicted are labelled criminals.

Now you want to argue with a convenient figure of speech?

Quote:Why not subscribe to a personal moral code, of what is good is what is beneficial to you? If you like it do it, if you don't, don't. If the benefit outweighs whatever personal cost, then go for it. Why try and place yourself under the authority of consensus opinion (society)?

We all subscribe to a personal moral code.

Quote:Are there things you find beneficial to yourself that you avoid doing because you're afraid of societies subjective moral opinions here?

Why, yes. And so do you.

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
04-04-2016, 04:39 PM
RE: Describe an Atheist Moral Code
(04-04-2016 04:37 PM)Tomasia Wrote:  
(04-04-2016 04:34 PM)TheBeardedDude Wrote:  No. How many times need this be explained?

Society can't collectively make something true that isn't. It can't decide collectively that evolution is false and it be true.

No, but they can collectively hold false beliefs. Those beliefs, don't become subjective when shown to be false though.

That's the stupidest fucking thing I've ever read.

You're STILL equating fact with belief, Poe.

Being nice is something stupid people do to hedge their bets
-Rick
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: