The Religious Components of Moral Beliefs
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
23-01-2015, 02:52 PM
RE: The Religious Components of Moral Beliefs
I'll focus on this post, because I can't for the life of me work out what the question is that this thread is focussing on. Perhaps DLJ's post is on the money?

(23-01-2015 12:40 PM)DLJ Wrote:  
(23-01-2015 10:00 AM)Tomasia Wrote:  ...
that there is no law, no law to justify our actions, and our desires, no transgression to be ashamed of
...

But there is.

I am constrained by my own set of ethics and imprisoned by and a product of my environment ... my culture ... both inherited and adopted.

I reject the notion that these laws are eternal / ethereal / transcendent / intrinsic / whatever. There is no shame because I recognise and accept the need for these contextual rules and norms.
Our actions have real and tangible consequences. If I attempt to murder you, then you will be motivated to use extreme force against me (in order to protect yourself), Your friends and loved ones will come to your aid and attempt to protect you or avenge your death. Any sub group you belong to may have a pact of standing up for the group, so they might also attack me. So I will be motivated (in my own self interest) not to try to kill you. It doesn't have to be based on moral beliefs or ethics or values. It can be based on a prediction of real consequences instead.

In order to protect my own life from those that may kill me, I join a group which makes a pact to protect its members. This group grows so large that it becomes a country. Our pact becomes the law.


(23-01-2015 12:40 PM)DLJ Wrote:  
(23-01-2015 10:00 AM)Tomasia Wrote:  ...
Particularly if we are unable to create something to replace this
...

Yet, all secular societies are creating these somethings all the time.

And we're getting better at it.

Yes
A governing body with the sole purpose of providing a stable and safe society rather than a moral one.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Stevil's post
23-01-2015, 05:37 PM
The Religious Components of Moral Beliefs
(23-01-2015 10:43 AM)Tomasia Wrote:  
(23-01-2015 08:33 AM)TheBeardedDude Wrote:  Then all that is necessary is a very simple response. You aren't acting morally if you are only doing "moral" actions because you're commanded to. That is amoral.

You mean according to your own subjective moral standards. It wouldn't be true for a deontologist, nor would it be true for consequentialist, who sees the question of intent as irrelevant.

**on a side not, if you can provide me a wikipedia page for the secular moral philosophy you subscribe to, where the morality or amorality of something is based on the intent, and what that intent is defined as, I would appreciate it. I'm curious to learn more about this, though it doesn't really have any bearing here.

You've defined your own version of morality. This skews everything you interpret from it.

You think morality can be ordered by someone. And morality can be defined by acting upon the commandments given to you. This is simply false. Which is why I mentioned the nazis all those pages ago. Operating and acting under the assumption that you've been given moral actions to commit, doesn't make you moral. It makes you a slave to the standards of another person.

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
23-01-2015, 05:40 PM
The Religious Components of Moral Beliefs
Also, I don't have a Wikipedia page from whence I draw my opinions. I reason through them myself. You've yet to actually rebut them, you just dismiss them.

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
24-01-2015, 02:02 AM
RE: The Religious Components of Moral Beliefs
(22-01-2015 04:02 PM)Tomasia Wrote:  The slave feeling the oppression and cruelty of his predicament, is unlikely to perceive the wrongness of his predicament as subjective, but a transgression of something sacred and holy, that has been violated.
He has to think that way.
The only people that are going to care about a point of view of the poor <insert slave race here> are the people belonging to that race. Those people don't have the power.
This slave needs to connect with his oppressors, he needs to convince them as to why he shouldn't be a slave, so he needs to step it up and create a group which includes himself as well as his oppressors. The human race group fits that mold.

As the world has become much more globally integrated, we have stopped being tribal and become open to having diverse societies and nations. We are now societies of humans rather that societies of such and such a tribe or such and such a race.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
24-01-2015, 07:08 AM
RE: The Religious Components of Moral Beliefs
(23-01-2015 10:57 AM)Momsurroundedbyboys Wrote:  Maybe that idea scares you a little, to stand up for your convictions without your chosen deity?


No, it doesn’t scare me much at all, and that scares me. But you're right to some extent about my moral convictions. If I didn’t hold my religious beliefs, I would have to recognize that my convictions are not real, not based on anything hallowed or sacred. That these once deeply held convictions, don’t correspond to any true beliefs, but rather merely a series of strong feelings, nothing more. That when I declare something as wrong, I’m merely declaring my discomfort, as I would a lumpy bed, or a poorly cushioned seat.

Of course it’s unlikely you see you own moral convictions and beliefs, in the absence of religion as anything of the sort. You probably do imagine them, as real and meaningful, seen as equivalent, or even as a worthy replacement for outdated religious model. You may even have some particular secular philosopher, a slew of liberal, enlightenment beliefs you still cling tightly to, as a child does his fluffy teddy bear. But once you see the incoherencies of these beliefs, there’s no returning back from it. Hearing atheists argue for the existence of right and wrong as something more than a series of personal preferences, is like watching a group of evangelicals reconciling biblical contradictions. The endeavor is self-satisfying, allowing one to preserve their false comforts, assuage any anxiety brought along by doubt, but it’s entirely unconvincing to those who’ve seen the incoherencies, and absurd circus trying to resolve them,.

If my religious beliefs, like those of Rev. Kings, are merely a series of delusional beliefs, I wouldn’t trade them in for another serious of delusional godless perspectives. I definetly wouldn’t be attaching myself to any of the enlightenment perspectives, humanistic beliefs, many of you cling too. I know for me to cling to something so unpersuasive, is to trade in one lie for an even weaker one.

What sense would it be for a man in my position of privilege, to risk it for some supposedly just or moral cause, which is really none of these things? All it is the voice of the old lady at the grocery store asking for a handout, who reeks and liters our nice neighborhood, an annoyance, a nag, like the pesky stinkbug that crawls in through the livingroom window. An unwanted rat creeping in through a hole in the cabinets.

You imagine the alternative is one that I’m scared of, but that’s your weakness speaking. My fear, is my lack of fear of it, how attractive it is, the appeal of it’s own liberation and freedom. Give the world a voice of an atheism like this, and I’ll find you a thousand converts, for each one you win to your sickly side. Here you have an atheisms not reserved for a minority of educated suburban dwellers, but one to win converts among every slum and ghetto, among every community attempting to hold their thin fabrics together. One that offers the greed, and selfishness, those shackled bodies of vices groaning for their freedom, a declaration that we have set these captives free.

I imagine, to your own humanistic portrait of the world, this alternative is darkly offensive and disgusting, monstrous even. And the problem is not that you are disgusted by this, but you lack an ability to see how attractive this is. That’s it’s a thing of immense Dionysian beauty.

Quote: It's hogwash. I'd like to shirk some of my responsibility, but I can't. I have obligations that must be met. I realize it and accept it,

That’s because you like something more, that risk being lost but shirking these supposed responsbilities. A cashier may really want to curse out a customer, but will likely restrain herself for fear of losing her job. You rather do these things you do begrudgingly, rather than deal with the anxiety and consequences of not doing them.

Quote:The idea that if everyone didn't believe we'd all just be doing what we want without any responsibility at all.

No, you’d be merely doing what you like, eroding whatever guilt cultures, societies, religions ingrain in you based on some imaginary boundaries you’re not supposed to cross. Don’t feel ashamed for your selfishness, your disregard for the lives of others, for your apathy, and indifference towards injustice that doesn’t disturb your suburban walls. There's no reason to be ashamed of it, anymore so than to be ashamed of masturbating. That suppose nagging voice of your consciousness, recognize that it is no voice at all. That those trying to sell you on a moral composs, are no different than those trying to sell you miracle water. The only good, is what is good for you, and you and you only,

Be a person concerned solely with what you like, and the means in which to obtain those things. That is all. Whether that means volunteering at a homeless shelter, or looting a liquor store, is to each his own. The father who leaves his wife and children, out of boredom, and a desire for a younger more attractive woman, is no different than a man trading in an old automobile for an updated model.

The line that says that men are not be treated like things, is a fictional one. Who am I to discourage you from crossing it?
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
24-01-2015, 07:32 AM
RE: The Religious Components of Moral Beliefs
(24-01-2015 07:08 AM)Tomasia Wrote:  
(23-01-2015 10:57 AM)Momsurroundedbyboys Wrote:  Maybe that idea scares you a little, to stand up for your convictions without your chosen deity?


No, it doesn’t scare me much at all, and that scares me. But you're right to some extent about my moral convictions. If I didn’t hold my religious beliefs, I would have to recognize that my convictions are not real, not based on anything hallowed or sacred. That these once deeply held convictions, don’t correspond to any true beliefs, but rather merely a series of strong feelings, nothing more. That when I declare something as wrong, I’m merely declaring my discomfort, as I would a lumpy bed, or a poorly cushioned seat.

Of course it’s unlikely you see you own moral convictions and beliefs, in the absence of religion as anything of the sort. You probably do imagine them, as real and meaningful, seen as equivalent, or even as a worthy replacement for outdated religious model. You may even have some particular secular philosopher, a slew of liberal, enlightenment beliefs you still cling tightly to, as a child does his fluffy teddy bear. But once you see the incoherencies of these beliefs, there’s no returning back from it. Hearing atheists argue for the existence of right and wrong as something more than a series of personal preferences, is like watching a group of evangelicals reconciling biblical contradictions. The endeavor is self-satisfying, allowing one to preserve their false comforts, assuage any anxiety brought along by doubt, but it’s entirely unconvincing to those who’ve seen the incoherencies, and absurd circus trying to resolve them,.

If my religious beliefs, like those of Rev. Kings, are merely a series of delusional beliefs, I wouldn’t trade them in for another serious of delusional godless perspectives. I definetly wouldn’t be attaching myself to any of the enlightenment perspectives, humanistic beliefs, many of you cling too. I know for me to cling to something so unpersuasive, is to trade in one lie for an even weaker one.

What sense would it be for a man in my position of privilege, to risk it for some supposedly just or moral cause, which is really none of these things? All it is the voice of the old lady at the grocery store asking for a handout, who reeks and liters our nice neighborhood, an annoyance, a nag, like the pesky stinkbug that crawls in through the livingroom window. An unwanted rat creeping in through a hole in the cabinets.

You imagine the alternative is one that I’m scared of, but that’s your weakness speaking. My fear, is my lack of fear of it, how attractive it is, the appeal of it’s own liberation and freedom. Give the world a voice of an atheism like this, and I’ll find you a thousand converts, for each one you win to your sickly side. Here you have an atheisms not reserved for a minority of educated suburban dwellers, but one to win converts among every slum and ghetto, among every community attempting to hold their thin fabrics together. One that offers the greed, and selfishness, those shackled bodies of vices groaning for their freedom, a declaration that we have set these captives free.

I imagine, to your own humanistic portrait of the world, this alternative is darkly offensive and disgusting, monstrous even. And the problem is not that you are disgusted by this, but you lack an ability to see how attractive this is. That’s it’s a thing of immense Dionysian beauty.

Quote: It's hogwash. I'd like to shirk some of my responsibility, but I can't. I have obligations that must be met. I realize it and accept it,

That’s because you like something more, that risk being lost but shirking these supposed responsbilities. A cashier may really want to curse out a customer, but will likely restrain herself for fear of losing her job. You rather do these things you do begrudgingly, rather than deal with the anxiety and consequences of not doing them.

Quote:The idea that if everyone didn't believe we'd all just be doing what we want without any responsibility at all.

No, you’d be merely doing what you like, eroding whatever guilt cultures, societies, religions ingrain in you based on some imaginary boundaries you’re not supposed to cross. Don’t feel ashamed for your selfishness, your disregard for the lives of others, for your apathy, and indifference towards injustice that doesn’t disturb your suburban walls. There's no reason to be ashamed of it, anymore so than to be ashamed of masturbating. That suppose nagging voice of your consciousness, recognize that it is no voice at all. That those trying to sell you on a moral composs, are no different than those trying to sell you miracle water. The only good, is what is good for you, and you and you only,

Be a person concerned solely with what you like, and the means in which to obtain those things. That is all. Whether that means volunteering at a homeless shelter, or looting a liquor store, is to each his own. The father who leaves his wife and children, out of boredom, and a desire for a younger more attractive woman, is no different than a man trading in an old automobile for an updated model.

The line that says that men are not be treated like things, is a fictional one. Who am I to discourage you from crossing it?

You like to go overboard into crazy extreme land sometimes, I get it.

I don't get your continually insistence of showing how social impacts alter your positions but not think that anyone actually can derive the social impacted moral positions. A person is not set to be doing merely what they like when it comes to their moral choices and actions in this world. Your constant attempts to seemingly try to break it down to that because it is either black/white that or objective choices is not conflated with how societies have formed and work.

"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
24-01-2015, 07:48 AM (This post was last modified: 24-01-2015 08:35 AM by Tomasia.)
RE: The Religious Components of Moral Beliefs
(24-01-2015 02:02 AM)Stevil Wrote:  He has to think that way.
The only people that are going to care about a point of view of the poor <insert slave race here> are the people belonging to that race. Those people don't have the power.
This slave needs to connect with his oppressors, he needs to convince them as to why he shouldn't be a slave, so he needs to step it up and create a group which includes himself as well as his oppressors. The human race group fits that mold.

But the component that connected him to his oppressors wasn't the fact that they are composed of the same parts, pieced together and called human.

It's once they became a part of a shared religion, that they were able to do this.

Plantation owners weren't eager to convert slaves to Christianity. For slaves to be Christian would amount to them being a part of the same community, and threatened the grasp of power between plantation owner and slave.

In England it was illegal to make a Christian a slave. Something quite poignantly highlighted in this account:

Quote:"I promised to do my best endeavor; and when I came home, spoke to the master of the plantation, and told him, that poor Sambo desired much to be a Christian. But his answer was, ‘The people of the island are governed by the laws of England, and by those laws, we could not make a Christian a slave. I told him, ‘My request was far different from that, for I desired to make a slave a Christian.’ His answer was, ‘That it was true, There was a great difference in that,’: But, being once a Christian, he could no more account him a slave, and so lose the hold they had of them as slaves, by making them Christians; and by that means should open such a gap, as all the planters in the island would curse him. So I was struck mute, and poor Sambo kept out of the Church."

http://scholar.library.miami.edu/slaves/...ffrey.html


Quote:"After the horrendous sea voyage from Africa, slaves were separated and placed on plantations in the West Indies. These slaves, already disoriented, were now forced into a brutal life of labor and surveillance. Day after day, the Africans cultivated crops, tended to animals, and served their "owners" in any way possible. Sixteen to eighteen hours of work was the norm on most West Indian plantations, and during the season of sugarcane harvest, most slaves only got four hours of sleep. The punishment for disobeying an order was far worse than just accepting what was asked. This treatment of the slaves created anger and hatred towards the white plantation owners, feelings that the slaves could vent in only one way: resistance. Yet for resistance to succeed, the slaves needed to share some common values. Those slaves who were able to convert to Christianity were able to create such a bond through a common religion. In turn, this unity served as a way to resist the atrocities the plantation owners imposed on them. Thus, for many slaves, Christianization served as a means of resistance throughout the period of the slave trade."

Quote:As the world has become much more globally integrated, we have stopped being tribal and become open to having diverse societies and nations. We are now societies of humans rather that societies of such and such a tribe or such and such a race.

Our integration is primarily an economical one. Our political concerns for other nations, is primarily a concern for their markets, upsetting the global balance. This may offer some leverage in pushing our supposed moral sentiments on to others, it also causes us to morally compromise ourselves. If our economic stability is dependent on cordial relationship with oppressive regimes, who violate supposed human rights, than we tend to keep very hush hush about it. The last we want to do is offend the Saudis, or the Chinese.

Communities are built on deep rooted, and committed bonds, on fellowship, and empathy. And these things have been steadily been eroding in even our privileged nations, let alone in regards to any sense of global "community". To even call it a community is the worst sort of euphemism. It's not a community, nor is it even a society, it's just several billion people playing the prisoners dilemma, with mutual distrust and cynicism.

But I'm surprised you of all people, would be the sort to peddle these hallmark sentiments. Global integration doesn't mean we're not tribal. Nor does it mean that we are somehow a part of some fictional brotherhood of man, as if we're on a course to be holding hands and singing Kumbaya with a bunch of foreigners. This may be a part of a weak particular liberal imagination, but it's the stuff of fluff. It's probably why we have to delude ourselves into thinking we entered Iraq for the sake of people, and not for sake of securing our oil interest. They're not people, like our people. We're still weeping for the lives of two-thousand of our own people who died a decade ago, while we take the lives of countless Arabs, women and children not even worthy of being called human, but collateral damage, like a pole maimed in a car crash. We're likely more troubled by dropping our smartphones, than dropping bombs. More likely to protest a pothole, than dead black or brown bodies. We already see people as things, sometimes not even deemed as valuable things. Why be saddened by our indifference, when you can welcome indifference with open arms? Why be ashamed for that which there is nothing to be ashamed of? Why be ashamed of not loving, when not loving is not wrong?
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
24-01-2015, 07:52 AM
RE: The Religious Components of Moral Beliefs
(24-01-2015 07:32 AM)ClydeLee Wrote:  A person is not set to be doing merely what they like when it comes to their moral choices and actions in this world.

Can you provide an example, that doesn't amount to me sacrificing something I like, for the sake of something I like more?
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
24-01-2015, 09:08 AM
RE: The Religious Components of Moral Beliefs
(24-01-2015 07:52 AM)Tomasia Wrote:  
(24-01-2015 07:32 AM)ClydeLee Wrote:  A person is not set to be doing merely what they like when it comes to their moral choices and actions in this world.

Can you provide an example, that doesn't amount to me sacrificing something I like, for the sake of something I like more?

I don't get the question because how would I know what you like?

"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
24-01-2015, 09:20 AM
RE: The Religious Components of Moral Beliefs
(24-01-2015 09:08 AM)ClydeLee Wrote:  
(24-01-2015 07:52 AM)Tomasia Wrote:  Can you provide an example, that doesn't amount to me sacrificing something I like, for the sake of something I like more?

I don't get the question because how would I know what you like?

Sorry, let's try it with you in mind. Can you provide an example, that doesn't amount to you sacrificing something you like, for the sake of something you like more?
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: