Do we as atheists REALLY have any basis for morals?
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 1 Votes - 5 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
08-12-2014, 08:03 PM
RE: Do we as atheists REALLY have any basis for morals?
(08-12-2014 07:44 PM)Bucky Ball Wrote:  
(08-12-2014 07:26 PM)The Drake Wrote:  For "Christ's" sake Bucky...stop being so smart. You make the rest of us heathens look...well...kind of dumb.Tongue

I think humans have an innate sense of morality from birth. How it is shaped is dependent on their upbringing. How they interpret it as an adult is up to the individual.

Well since even rats have been shown to have empathy, you're probably on track.
Human values are culturally relative in every culture, (including Christian culture which claims to have "absolutes ... but which we know has all sorts of variations depending on circumstances and interpretations of those circumstances, which the vast numbers of Christian sects in many ways all disagree about), but most important they are LEARNED values and expectations from the cultures in which they exist.

Ok. For Jebus' sake I'll go say my prayers. Rolleyes

It's ok, Bucky. I will pray with you..



wait...



Whut?

When I want your opinion I'll read your entrails.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
08-12-2014, 08:08 PM
RE: Do we as atheists REALLY have any basis for morals?
(08-12-2014 06:14 PM)The Drake Wrote:  
(08-12-2014 05:57 PM)RuthD Wrote:  I was raised a Catholic by force as a child. I hated it. I have to admit my morals in the past have come from being raised in the church. But now I am free to examine and change any way I want. The problem is I haven't learned how to do that yet. I am doing a lot of contemplation, though. One thing I respect is not to do harm to any others. But then I have done much harm in the past not really intending to. Atheism has opened a whole new world to me to be a free thinker. I guess doing a lot of thinking on what is right to me and wrong to me will be my task now.

For the most part, the morals instilled on you by "the church" are good. It's up to you to interpret them in the context of your new found freedom and apply them in your approach to the world as a whole.
That is what I'm up to now.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
08-12-2014, 08:12 PM
RE: Do we as atheists REALLY have any basis for morals?
(08-12-2014 07:44 PM)Bucky Ball Wrote:  
(08-12-2014 07:26 PM)The Drake Wrote:  For "Christ's" sake Bucky...stop being so smart. You make the rest of us heathens look...well...kind of dumb.Tongue

I think humans have an innate sense of morality from birth. How it is shaped is dependent on their upbringing. How they interpret it as an adult is up to the individual.

Well since even rats have been shown to have empathy, you're probably on track.
Human values are culturally relative in every culture, (including Christian culture which claims to have "absolutes ... but which we know has all sorts of variations depending on circumstances and interpretations of those circumstances, which the vast numbers of Christian sects in many ways all disagree about), but most important they are LEARNED values and expectations from the cultures in which they exist.

Ok. For Jebus' sake I'll go say my prayers. Rolleyes

But our core morality and our values are two separate things. When we start substituting our values for morality, we justify immorality in the name of our values. And then we get spanked.

The second mouse gets the cheese.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
08-12-2014, 08:36 PM
RE: Do we as atheists REALLY have any basis for morals?




I think someone was sipping Earl Grey with his frat buds at Manchester watching Friends reruns and came across this episode and decided to bust our balls.

Check out my now-defunct atheism blog. It's just a blog, no ads, no revenue, no gods.
----
Atheism promotes critical thinking; theism promotes hypocritical thinking. -- Me
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
09-12-2014, 01:56 AM
RE: Do we as atheists REALLY have any basis for morals?
(08-12-2014 08:36 PM)WillHopp Wrote:  



I think someone was sipping Earl Grey with his frat buds at Manchester watching Friends reruns and came across this episode and decided to bust our balls.

Uh I never could stand that show

"A witty quote means nothing"
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
09-12-2014, 07:26 AM
RE: Do we as atheists REALLY have any basis for morals?
(08-12-2014 12:43 PM)tear151 Wrote:  
(08-12-2014 12:38 PM)Bucky Ball Wrote:  I know what you're doing. Repeating it, (as others have pointed out to you), does not make it true. SELF INTEREST IS A STANDARD.
Isn't that special. You have your own personal definition of morality, and think somehow it's interesting, or relevant to talk about. Morality has many definitions. Nowhere has anyone ever, (except you) said morality is limited to how people TALK about what they do. Self interest may not need to be justified, but it's NOT THE ONLY consideration. Your definition is crap.

Have fun in your special little world.

Ok, I will, bye now. Sure, by your definition it is a moral standard, yes, wonderful. The semantics of it don't effect the actual ideas behind any of it. When someone says morality, we all have the same conception, and your definition is not only objectively correct, the words and definitions are actually relevant in terms of the ideas themselves, and you had every reasont to start shouting at me and calling me an ignorant fool because of that, you have enlightened me, can you stop insulting me now?

This is a little disingenuous, since at no point at all you do differentiate that in your original post. There's no inclusion of outside self interest being an aspect of morality as I've ever seen it when debated around these forums in philosophic sections. Beyond that, I have no idea what you define as "moralist." These contrarians you speak of aren't actually identified by any actual demonstrated point.

I'm at least glad you eventually referenced Locke in this discussion.. I thought you must of already come across him and his era on this topic if you are a philosophy student. I asked about it earlier in the thread but it got cluttered and not responded to by you. You already reject some of those "self-evident" ideas but I've still not seen what of any contrasts you have to the ideas of the social contract? I don't get what about it in it's manners you find not consistent or logical in understanding of morality. It isn't necessarily considered anything more than doing what is helpful to society because you have the foresight to see it will benefit yourself. It's still all self interest in manner.

I also don't get the distinction being so needed about morality tied to Gods. We have known it is nonsense for a good many years now. We aren't tied down still prior to the 19th century in philosophical thoughts. It's also known that morality is something that comes form an evolutionary basis. What to do with those intrinsic ideas is how you go about it yourself. I agree you make up it all for yourself, but you aren't making the term morality worthless to say it's something we do for self-interest.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
09-12-2014, 07:31 AM
RE: Do we as atheists REALLY have any basis for morals?
(08-12-2014 08:12 PM)The Drake Wrote:  
(08-12-2014 07:44 PM)Bucky Ball Wrote:  Well since even rats have been shown to have empathy, you're probably on track.
Human values are culturally relative in every culture, (including Christian culture which claims to have "absolutes ... but which we know has all sorts of variations depending on circumstances and interpretations of those circumstances, which the vast numbers of Christian sects in many ways all disagree about), but most important they are LEARNED values and expectations from the cultures in which they exist.

Ok. For Jebus' sake I'll go say my prayers. Rolleyes

But our core morality and our values are two separate things. When we start substituting our values for morality, we justify immorality in the name of our values. And then we get spanked.

Explain.
What is the difference between "core morality" and "personal values" ?

Insufferable know-it-all.Einstein God has a plan for us. Please stop screwing it up with your prayers.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
09-12-2014, 08:13 AM
RE: Do we as atheists REALLY have any basis for morals?
(09-12-2014 07:26 AM)ClydeLee Wrote:  
(08-12-2014 12:43 PM)tear151 Wrote:  Ok, I will, bye now. Sure, by your definition it is a moral standard, yes, wonderful. The semantics of it don't effect the actual ideas behind any of it. When someone says morality, we all have the same conception, and your definition is not only objectively correct, the words and definitions are actually relevant in terms of the ideas themselves, and you had every reasont to start shouting at me and calling me an ignorant fool because of that, you have enlightened me, can you stop insulting me now?

This is a little disingenuous, since at no point at all you do differentiate that in your original post. There's no inclusion of outside self interest being an aspect of morality as I've ever seen it when debated around these forums in philosophic sections. Beyond that, I have no idea what you define as "moralist." These contrarians you speak of aren't actually identified by any actual demonstrated point.

I'm at least glad you eventually referenced Locke in this discussion.. I thought you must of already come across him and his era on this topic if you are a philosophy student. I asked about it earlier in the thread but it got cluttered and not responded to by you. You already reject some of those "self-evident" ideas but I've still not seen what of any contrasts you have to the ideas of the social contract? I don't get what about it in it's manners you find not consistent or logical in understanding of morality. It isn't necessarily considered anything more than doing what is helpful to society because you have the foresight to see it will benefit yourself. It's still all self interest in manner.

I also don't get the distinction being so needed about morality tied to Gods. We have known it is nonsense for a good many years now. We aren't tied down still prior to the 19th century in philosophical thoughts. It's also known that morality is something that comes form an evolutionary basis. What to do with those intrinsic ideas is how you go about it yourself. I agree you make up it all for yourself, but you aren't making the term morality worthless to say it's something we do for self-interest.

Actually in my op I said "reasons to behave morally seperate from self interest. My definition means "a moral action is an action that is good", "A good action is imtrinsically better than a non good one". Thats what I deny, thr ability to claim such.

Its the difference between replacing rights with wants, justice with what is agreeable, im simply saying its an incoherent word that has many simply false implications about what is all part of self interest.

"A witty quote means nothing"
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
09-12-2014, 08:19 AM
RE: Do we as atheists REALLY have any basis for morals?
(09-12-2014 08:13 AM)tear151 Wrote:  
(09-12-2014 07:26 AM)ClydeLee Wrote:  This is a little disingenuous, since at no point at all you do differentiate that in your original post. There's no inclusion of outside self interest being an aspect of morality as I've ever seen it when debated around these forums in philosophic sections. Beyond that, I have no idea what you define as "moralist." These contrarians you speak of aren't actually identified by any actual demonstrated point.

I'm at least glad you eventually referenced Locke in this discussion.. I thought you must of already come across him and his era on this topic if you are a philosophy student. I asked about it earlier in the thread but it got cluttered and not responded to by you. You already reject some of those "self-evident" ideas but I've still not seen what of any contrasts you have to the ideas of the social contract? I don't get what about it in it's manners you find not consistent or logical in understanding of morality. It isn't necessarily considered anything more than doing what is helpful to society because you have the foresight to see it will benefit yourself. It's still all self interest in manner.

I also don't get the distinction being so needed about morality tied to Gods. We have known it is nonsense for a good many years now. We aren't tied down still prior to the 19th century in philosophical thoughts. It's also known that morality is something that comes form an evolutionary basis. What to do with those intrinsic ideas is how you go about it yourself. I agree you make up it all for yourself, but you aren't making the term morality worthless to say it's something we do for self-interest.

Actually in my op I said "reasons to behave morally seperate from self interest.

Its the difference between replacing rights with wants, justice with what is agreeable, im simply saying its an incoherent word that has many simply false implications about what is all part of self interest.

No you didn't. I just relooked at the post. In no where do you even use the words self-interest or separate... You say what legitimacy do you have to push it onto the world, but I don't see that as the same thing.

I still don't see where it truly is anything with false implications. I'm not sure why these are of concern to anyone. The religious implication is something I see as irrelevant in as in philosophical sense, they've been mainly rendered pointless in these topics for centuries.

"Allow there to be a spectrum in all that you see" - Neil Degrasse Tyson
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
09-12-2014, 08:43 AM
RE: Do we as atheists REALLY have any basis for morals?
(09-12-2014 08:19 AM)ClydeLee Wrote:  
(09-12-2014 08:13 AM)tear151 Wrote:  Actually in my op I said "reasons to behave morally seperate from self interest.

Its the difference between replacing rights with wants, justice with what is agreeable, im simply saying its an incoherent word that has many simply false implications about what is all part of self interest.

No you didn't. I just relooked at the post. In no where do you even use the words self-interest or separate... You say what legitimacy do you have to push it onto the world, but I don't see that as the same thing.

I still don't see where it truly is anything with false implications. I'm not sure why these are of concern to anyone. The religious implication is something I see as irrelevant in as in philosophical sense, they've been mainly rendered pointless in these topics for centuries.

I said

"Why should I behave in a way you consider moral for its own sake"

"A witty quote means nothing"
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: