Switch Theme:

Can atheists be moral ?  [RSS] Share on facebook Share on Twitter Submit to Reddit
»
Author Message
Advert


Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you:
  • No adverts like this in the forums anymore.
  • Times and dates in your local timezone.
  • Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance.
  • Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely.
  • Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net.
If you are already a member then feel free to login now.




Made in gb
[DCM]
Et In Arcadia Ego





Canterbury

Spinning off, under welcome advisement, from the " too fat to shoot thread"..

Mr. Jfrazell wrote:Red8N: Can atheists be moral? This is whole other and interesting thread (again posting opportunity). I'm not saying they can't - its a philosophy and real life question.
The only avowed atheists I've met personally have been clinical level narcissists that didn't care a wit for anyone except themselves, including their own children (I mean clinical as in determined by psychiatrists). The only big ones I've seen were Hitler (who can be argued might have been an occultist) and the great communist killers who were highly adapt at being amoral (Stalin, Pol Pot, Chairman Mao, Lenin).


Wow ! Page one and we're already on the Nazis

Whilst I would agree that that the great communists murderers you mention were terrible men, I would argue that whilst they may well have professed to be atheistic the systems they set up- and I think there's a strong argument for saying the same about Hitler too-- in reality they were little more than cults of personality, with the all wise all knowing all loving deity simply being replaced by the factions leader. The adoration these terrible men are still held in even today in parts of the countries they pretty much destroyed says something about this I think.

I think the point you raise about the atheists you've met perhaps ties in what i mentioned in the other thread. I'm not friends with anyone who goes to church or holds any strong religious beliefs at all, if I extend my contact circle outwards to include pretty much everyone I know then there's' 2... maybe 3 people at work who attend church-- and they go to some happy clappy born again new wave Christianity affair. I gather they even use guitars *shudders*-- and 1 Muslim guy I'm friends with, and he and his boyfriend aren't especially conformist I suppose. They don't go home to Iran very often either but that's a whole other thread.
Now I work at a university so I suppose there;s an argument that the people there are perhaps inclined more to liberal thought/wishy washyness ( take your pick ! ), but I tend to mix more with the support staff who are much more regular joes than the academics-- who do frequently live a a little world of their own I can't deny-- and none of them are religious at all.

So in my experience all the atheists I know-- self included-- I would view as "moral", all be it to greater or lesser extents I suppose. I must point out of course that many/most of these people aren't in all likelihood staunch atheists perhaps-- when in foxholes etc etc right perhaps ? , but I don't think this is any more affecting than people who profess to have a faith and are sometimes found wanting be it in there behaviour or thoughts.

Over here we have a fair few "famous" atheists who are generally respected and admired : Dawkins ( obviously), Attenborough etc etc

Doesn't seem to be the same level of ease or acceptance of atheism stateside, I mean I'm sure you have (many) well educated and well spoken atheists but from we hear that really seems to be a big no-no over your side of the pond/.

We tend to get stories like this with regards to atheism stateside.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2008/08/14 13:15:24


The poor man really has a stake in the country. The rich man hasn't; he can go away to New Guinea in a yacht. The poor have sometimes objected to being governed badly; the rich have always objected to being governed at all
We love our superheroes because they refuse to give up on us. We can analyze them out of existence, kill them, ban them, mock them, and still they return, patiently reminding us of who we are and what we wish we could be.
"the play's the thing wherein I'll catch the conscience of the king,
 
   
Made in us
Ancient Chaos Terminator




South Pasadena

Even if there were no God, man would create one. Being answerable to a higher power helps to keep people moral. Religion, at it's core, teaches morality.

Can you be "moral" without belieiving in a higher power, yes. But, it is easier to be moral when you fear the retribution of a higher power.

 
   
Made in us
Hangin' with Gork & Mork






I'm going to disagree with Darrian. Morality != Religion and vice versa. At it's core Religion teaches man about his place and position in existence.

In Hauser's The Moral Mind (if I recall correctly) a social experiment was done in which people from different religions and backgrounds were all presented with a set of scenario's and asked how they would respond. Gut reactions were almost universal regardless of religion. People almost always agreed on what to do, but when asked why they did it is when arguments arose. I'm obliviously simplifying it to an extent because of space and time reasons.

There is also the Confucius story in which he points out the human nature is in essence good. If a man were walking across a bridge and saw a child had fallen into the water he would jump into the water to save the child without consideration. Our first instinct is to help, regardless of religion.

This is not to say that religion isn't important or useless, just that it is not the same thing as morality. Spirituality != Morality.

Amidst the mists and coldest frosts he thrusts his fists against the posts and still insists he sees the ghosts.
 
   
Made in us
Rogue Daemonhunter fueled by Chaos






Toledo, OH

@ Ahtman: Excellent post. You beat me to the punch!

A brief look at comparitive religions shows that morality is remarkable similar across them all. All oppose murder, theft, adultry, etc. Even the seeming differences are usually of degree, not of position. Look at the view of religions to alcohol. Some religions ban it entirely (islam and LDS), others work to minimize it's consumption, and others are pretty ok with it (Catholic Church). At first it looks conflicting, but virtually none of the religions see alcohol, or even it's consumption, as a sin in itself. It's drunkenness that is a sin, and different religions simply go to different lengths to protect against it. Catholics believe that moderate use can't do any harm, while Muslims believe that any use could lead to turning them away from Allah. It's a difference of practice, not of core morality.

As for Aethists, there's no reason they can't be moral. Morality is simply the idea that a person should minimize the negative impact they have on others while maximizing the positive. It doesn't take deep faith to know not to steal or cheat or murder.

As for atheists being jerks, well, they certainly exist. There are many levels of atheism that I just invented:
1) Agnostics. They don't' know what they believe. Most probably revert to the religions of their background or culture in a pinch.
2) Soft Core Atheists. They're pretty sure there isn't a god, but tend to be pretty quiet about it.
3) Hard Core Atheists. These are the godless equivilent of Born Again Christians. They're convinced there is no go, they're proud of their belief, and they mention it with little provocation. For them, Atheism is a faith. Many think religion is a net negatice to humanity.
4) Flaming Atheists. These are people who not only are pretty fervrent in their belief in a lack of god, they see faith in god himself to be a tool for evil.

I'm not atheism itself makes one a jerk, but I think jerks can be drawn to crusades of any faith, be it christian, islamic, or Atheist.
   
Made in us
5th God of Chaos! (Yea'rly!)




The Great State of Texas

Ahtman wrote:

There is also the Confucius story in which he points out the human nature is in essence good. If a man were walking across a bridge and saw a child had fallen into the water he would jump into the water to save the child without consideration. Our first instinct is to help, regardless of religion.



I'd disagree with that one in a big way, but its an even different thread. I just have much less faith in humanity personally. Unfortunately news events do nothing to dissuade me of that.

-"Wait a minute.....who is that Frazz is talking to in the gallery? Hmmm something is going on here.....Oh.... it seems there is some dispute over video taping of some sort......Frazz is really upset now..........wait a minute......whats he go there.......is it? Can it be?....Frazz has just unleashed his hidden weiner dog from his mini bag, while quoting shakespeares "Let slip the dogs the war!!" GG
-"Don't mind Frazzled. He's just Dakka's crazy old dude locked in the attic. He's harmless. Mostly."
-TBone the Magnificent 1999-2014, Long Live the King!
 
   
Made in gb
[DCM]
Et In Arcadia Ego





Canterbury

Yeah, I've got to admit I think tere's a whole bunch of people who'd just film the event on their poxy mobile phones to sell to the press or upload on you-tube.

That said, I'm sure that most people would at least try and do something. " World is a beatiful place and worth" etc etc etc

The poor man really has a stake in the country. The rich man hasn't; he can go away to New Guinea in a yacht. The poor have sometimes objected to being governed badly; the rich have always objected to being governed at all
We love our superheroes because they refuse to give up on us. We can analyze them out of existence, kill them, ban them, mock them, and still they return, patiently reminding us of who we are and what we wish we could be.
"the play's the thing wherein I'll catch the conscience of the king,
 
   
Made in us
5th God of Chaos! (Yea'rly!)




The Great State of Texas

Lots of interesting studies on that. US studies tend to show, the less bystanders/traffic, the more likely you are to stop and help someone. When there's lots of traffic forget it.

-"Wait a minute.....who is that Frazz is talking to in the gallery? Hmmm something is going on here.....Oh.... it seems there is some dispute over video taping of some sort......Frazz is really upset now..........wait a minute......whats he go there.......is it? Can it be?....Frazz has just unleashed his hidden weiner dog from his mini bag, while quoting shakespeares "Let slip the dogs the war!!" GG
-"Don't mind Frazzled. He's just Dakka's crazy old dude locked in the attic. He's harmless. Mostly."
-TBone the Magnificent 1999-2014, Long Live the King!
 
   
Made in us
Longtime Dakkanaut



NoVA

I think a person is good and collectively people can be very selfish. There is a reason why the word MOB is ugly.

I see too much variance to believe people are inherently good or evil. The purpose of society and government and these social contracts we make with each other is to foster an environment where taking care of your fellow man is beneficial to your self-interest. Strip everything away, and that's it.

I absolutely agree with Polonius' assessment of atheists. But most of soft-core, reasonable folks. Like most Christians and Muslims and Jewish folks are soft-core reasonable folks. The fringe of anything probably sucks.

Atheists simply find a different compass for their philosophical and moral beliefs. Religion is merely an option for doing so.
   
Made in us
Nasty Nob on Warbike with Klaw





Buzzard's Knob

I'd have to say on the scale mentioned above I'm a 2.5, I don't go around pointing out to people that I'm an atheist, and if someone asks I won't start on a rant about it, but if they push me, it's ON! Especially those who refuse to accept that anyone could not have some degree of religious belief. I believe there's an afterlife and a soul and that people go on to a different existance after they die, I just don't believe that there's anybody in charge of it. (No "intelligent design." happens.) I do believe in Karma and how it affects your path through the various stages of existance, including reincarnation, but more in the form of a sort of spiritual conscience. I have my own settings when it comes to right and wrong, which are from my experience not too far off the norm and nobody, especially the government is gonna change me. That's all I have to say about that. Back to slaughterin' anybody whose skin ain't green.

WAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAGGGGGHHHHH!!!!!!!!!! 
   
Made in ca
Morally-Flexible Malleus Hearing Whispers






Well I kind of moved near Toronto, actually.

I didn't read everything but it is possible to have faith in the goodness of man without having faith in the goodness of a god. Civilization exists, we haven't killed each other off yet.

Dakka Articles: Eldar Tactica | In Defence of Starcannons (math) | Ork Takktika Quick Tips
taco online: WoW PvP
ur hax are nubz 
   
Made in us
Executing Exarch





Los Angeles

Darrian13 wrote:Being answerable to a higher power helps to keep people moral.... Can you be "moral" without belieiving in a higher power, yes. But, it is easier to be moral when you fear the retribution of a higher power.

This is true, but that's because it plays on the human elements of fear and greed. You do the right thing because if you do, your deity will reward you. You avoid doing bad things because you fear punishment from your deity. The thing is that this "higher power" doesn't have to be spiritual in nature. Go back to those last couple of sentences and replace "diety" with "government" and you end up with a similar effect. "Parent" works too if you're a kid. The government can be more effective in some cases because people can be sure of the consequences (I ran a red light and got a ticket, or I killed someone and ended up in jail) where as the deity one plays on the fear/hope of the unknown and future promise (you'll be rewarded / punished in the afterlife). The over all effectiveness depends on the individual though so I couldn't say one is better at keeping people in line than the other.

As for the main topic of morality, both religion and society have frame works for morality. You can get influences from both but again, it’s really up to the individual to find what they accept and like. I think that it’s intrinsically a part of human nature to feel good when you do a "good deed". And everyone likes to feel good so people will generally do good. Now everyone gets differing levels of "good feeling" from various acts so you'll get some people that go to extraordinary lengths to help others and be "good" people and you'll get others that are significantly less willing to go out of their way to do "good" things because its not worth the trouble for them. Here however is where religion can give people a little extra push since not only will it pander to people's feelings of doing good is good, but it will also appeal to their sence of greed since they believe they will be rewarded for doing good.

As far as (in)famous people, there have been plenty on both sides of the fence. I hardly think that one side or the other can really be pinned down for causing more misery and trouble in the world than the other. Everyone likes to bring up Hitler because he's an icon of evil. And while that image is well deserved, it certainly isn't something that can be attributed to any group outside of possibly the Nazis. Heck, if you want to look a body count as a measure of evil, far more people have died over the course of history for Jesus than did for Hitler and that's really sad since his base message (as I understand it at least) was that everyone should love each other and be happy. Or if you want a more direct person involved, how about the popes that sanctioned the crusades and similar things. So in the end, you can find bad apples in every bunch.

All in all though, religion is hardly necessary for people to be good.

This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2008/08/17 18:45:56


**** Phoenix ****

Threads should be like skirts: long enough to cover what's important but short enough to keep it interesting. 
   
Made in us
Decrepit Dakkanaut






SoCal, USA!

Speaking as a practicing Atheist, I'll state that Morality, (Organized) Religion, Theism, and Atheism have very little to do with one another.

Morality simply governs how one interacts with one's fellow man. It is more cultural than religious. The Confucian example is excellent, because Confucian teaching dictates a code of correct behaviour and right action that has absolutely nothing to do with Religion or Theist belief.

(Organized) Religion often dictates a certain morality, but that has more to do with imposing control on the populance than righteousness itself. See the late Carlin's commentary on the 10 Commandments, which can really boil down to two (or three) simple rules. Because otherwise, there is NO way you're going to tithe a big chunk of your paycheck to some random stranger, listen to him rant and rave for an hour or two while wearing wierd clothes, and let him have "secret, unsupervised alone time" with your children, and then believe him when he says he didn't touch them.

So let's get real: if Theisim automatically created Morality in people, why would Religion need to dicate Commandments and punishments?

   
Made in de
Dominating Dominatrix






Piercing the heavens

That's quite an interesting topic you guys started here.

To answer the main question: Yes, of course they can. But in the end I guess it all depends on how people have been raised. On paper I'm still catholic, did some of that youth-stuff that comes with it, but at some point I just stopped believing. I mean, when I was a kid, the whole God thing was pretty basic and I had religion classes in elementary school, but over the years I lost...well, faith, I guess. I still do my best to be a good person, but I have actual problems with seeing a belief system as the catholic church, or most of the other god-based world religions, as something completly possitive.
I've become an atheist for a singel reason, because I just can't seen to get around the fact that God is supposed to be that allmighty and omnipotent beeing he's cracked up to be for one reason. If he's really one of the good guys, he should stopped humanity at least a millenium ago, if not much MUCH earlier. I just find it hard to believe in a superior beeing, who just sits up there and calmly watches, let's say...the holocaust. I might be getting a little too much off-topic here, but it's just something I wanted to get off my chest.

In the end, I may be an atheist now, a level 2 I guess, if we use Polonius' list. Still, I'm trying my best to live a good life, even if there is no afterlife I get rewarded/punished in, it's just something I want to do for myself.

But if there acutally is life after death, and the whole christianity thing turns out to be true, I really need to tal to the big mean and knock some sense into him.
   
Made in us
[DCM]
Tilter at Windmills






Manchester, NH

Speaking as a religious person, and as one who has served as clergy for a few years, I have to answer the basic question with "certainly."

In my opinion all mature and adult morality stems from the choice to make the world a better place, and to act morally, because it is better for you and better for everyone else. Not because of the fear of punishment, or the hope for a reward in the afterlife. Fear and greed are not motivations worthy of a man.

I have a lot of respect and sympathy for atheists; at least the ones who aren't rude and dogmatic about it. Which is most of them. Fanatics of any stripe tend to make poor conversationalists and offensive company.

As for Hitler, may I just quote the man himself?

"My feelings as a Christian points me to my Lord and Savior as a fighter. It points me to the man who once in loneliness, surrounded by a few followers, recognized these Jews for what they were and summoned men to fight against them and who, God's truth! was greatest not as a sufferer but as a fighter. In boundless love as a Christian and as a man I read through the passage which tells us how the Lord at last rose in His might and seized the scourge to drive out of the Temple the brood of vipers and adders. How terrific was His fight for the world against the Jewish poison. To-day, after two thousand years, with deepest emotion I recognize more profoundly than ever before the fact that it was for this that He had to shed His blood upon the Cross. As a Christian I have no duty to allow myself to be cheated, but I have the duty to be a fighter for truth and justice... And if there is anything which could demonstrate that we are acting rightly it is the distress that daily grows. For as a Christian I have also a duty to my own people.


-Adolf Hitler, in a speech on 12 April 1922 (Norman H. Baynes, ed. The Speeches of Adolf Hitler, April 1922-August 1939, Vol. 1 of 2, pp. 19-20, Oxford University Press, 1942)
http://www.nobeliefs.com/hitler.htm

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2008/08/15 00:38:33


Adepticon 2015: Team Tourney Best Imperial Team- Team Ironguts, Adepticon 2014: Team Tourney 6th/120, Best Imperial Team- Cold Steel Mercs 2, 40k Championship Qualifier ~25/226
More 2010-2014 GT/Major RTT Record (W/L/D) -- CSM: 78-20-9 // SW: 8-1-2 (Golden Ticket with SW), BA: 29-9-4 6th Ed GT & RTT Record (W/L/D) -- CSM: 36-12-2 // BA: 11-4-1 // SW: 1-1-1
DT:70S++++G(FAQ)M++B++I+Pw40k99#+D+++A+++/sWD105R+++T(T)DM+++++
A better way to score Sportsmanship in tournaments
The 40K Rulebook & Codex FAQs. You should have these bookmarked if you play this game.
The Dakka Dakka Forum Rules You agreed to abide by these when you signed up.

Maelstrom's Edge! 
   
Made in ie
Joined the Military for Authentic Experience






Nuremberg

I'm agnostic, but not in as unsure a light as Polonius has cast it. I believe doubt is important, and certainty is a bit dangerous if you have no reason for it. So I chose doubt as my position, until I have some evidence.
And certainly, I can be moral. Anyone who thinks otherwise would do well do read a basic text on moral philosophy. My outlook is based around the social contract idea.

   
Made in gb
Grumpy Longbeard






This is interesting indeed, but I really don't see it this way at all. Surely, if you are atheistic and believe in evolution, then we all have common ancestors, are all related and are therefore one unit working together for the sake of the species. That's certainly how I interpret atheism anyway, the great undivider. my atheism has only made me more moral and caring for my fellow man. I agree wholeheartedly with the first paragraph of Phoenix's post.

Altruism has an evolutionary benefit, the you scratch my back, I'll scratch your idea, but also through the concept of the selfish gene (misleading name, I know). Basically, this boils down to the fact that our genes want to be passed on, and therefore we need to be nice to potential mates, and our offspring. Thus, we developed the desire to help others close to us instinctively, to protect our genes. In modern society, we no longer live in these small, close-knit kin groups, but live in close contact with others who share no genes with us everyday. Our genes still tell us to be kind to those around us, and therefore, we have the inate urge to be good to those around us.

Darwinism often gets mistakenly used as an excuse for eugenics, social cleansing, or simply neo-conservative ideals of leaving the poor to struggle, if they're not surviving, well, that's just evolution.

I think this is wrong on a number of fundamental levels, we have evolved the unique characteristic of being concious of our surroundings and what impact we have on them. Using this we can escape the barbaric tyranny of natural selection and rise above it. Just because that's how nature works, doesn't mean that's how it should be.

If you live in the UK, Richard Dawkins has a series on Darwin on at the moment which is really quite excellent. The second episode deals with the morality of atheism and Darwinism brilliantly. You can see it on 4od, or it might be on youtube or summat. It's really very interesting viewing if you're into this topic.

I may have wandered miles off topic here, but what the hey.

Depending on my mood (and intoxication) I vary from a level 2 to a level 4 atheist, judging on those criteria, but I'm not a crusader in that I'll batter anyone into repenting their belief, but I certainly will question it if it's brought up. In a previous thread I certainly acted the level 4, but I think that one just got out of hand.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2008/08/15 00:57:32


Opinions are like arseholes. Everyone's got one and they all stink. 
   
Made in au
Longtime Dakkanaut






Springhurst, VIC, Australia

Darrian13 wrote:Even if there were no God, man would create one. Being answerable to a higher power helps to keep people moral. Religion, at it's core, teaches morality.

Can you be "moral" without belieiving in a higher power, yes. But, it is easier to be moral when you fear the retribution of a higher power.


fear doesnt ensure loyalty (unless you ask a commisssar before he shoots you)

DC:90+S++G++MB+I+Pw40k98-ID++A++/hWD284R++T(T)DM+

Squigy's Gallery, come have a look
 
   
Made in au
[DCM]
.. .-.. .-.. ..- -- .. -. .- - ..






Toowoomba, Australia

Yes they can be moral.

RANT:
Organised religion is being replaced by atheists with Evirohippyglobalwarminganticorpoatisationalism.

They have simply replaced the end of the world through God's wrath with the ned of the world by man's treatment of the environment. Apocalypse by another name. And they demand everyone should repent by recycling and having shorter showers. :(

Hopefully syr will see this thread and let us know (as a rabbi) if any of his congregation have turned from religion (for whatever reason) and how it affects the rest of the community.

Me I'm a born again Anglican going to an Assembly of God church (as its up the road) and my wife is a uniting church member who is the daughter of a uniting church mother who once ran her own church but now goes to her local angican church where she helps out and plays the organ.

Am I moral? Sometimes yes, sometimes no but I work hard to reduce my flaws (primarily swearing ATM and a lack of patience for those too dumb/lazy to improve themselves)
*Samuel Jackson voice*
I'm tryin' Ringo, I'm tryin' real hard....

2025: Games Played:8/Models Bought:162/Sold:169/Painted:125
2024: Games Played:6/Models Bought:393/Sold:519/Painted: 207
2023: Games Played:0/Models Bought:287/Sold:0/Painted: 203
2020-2022: Games Played:42/Models Bought:1271/Sold:631/Painted:442
2016-19: Games Played:369/Models Bought:772/Sold:378/ Painted:268
2012-15: Games Played:412/Models Bought: 1163/Sold:730/Painted:436 
   
Made in us
Decrepit Dakkanaut






SoCal, USA!

Squig_herder wrote:
Darrian13 wrote:Even if there were no God, man would create one. Being answerable to a higher power helps to keep people moral. Religion, at it's core, teaches morality.

Can you be "moral" without belieiving in a higher power, yes. But, it is easier to be moral when you fear the retribution of a higher power.


fear doesnt ensure loyalty (unless you ask a commisssar before he shoots you)


Love creates Loyalty.

Fear ensures Obedience.

There is a difference.

   
Made in us
Longtime Dakkanaut



NoVA

I have radically argued with double DD here over GW related topics.

But that's a very insightful post. Brevity always wins. He is 100% correct about loyalty and obedience.
   
Made in au
The Dread Evil Lord Varlak





Can I also ask ‘are all people of faith dogmatic and incapable of independent thought?’ Or would that be an offensive, ignorant stereotype?

Meanwhile Hitler was a Roman Catholic, belonging to a particular branch called Positive Christianity, that re-wrote Jesus as an Aryan anti-semite (yeah, I know, but that’s Hitler for you). The occultist stuff is based on some old and entirely fictional myths, and really should be disregarded unless you’re writing a pulp novel.

Oh, and pointing out Stalin et al as atheist monsters is missing the point rather terribly. It wasn’t their lack of faith in God but their faith in communism that led to their horrendous acts. The answer really is that people who believe in something, anything, strongly enough that it overrides basic human decency will probably end up as a villain.

Meanwhile the following are all atheists, and I don’t think you can argue any of them are immoral monsters;

Douglas Adams
George Orwell
Terry Pratchett
Salman Rushdie
The guy who did Babylon 5
Bjork
David Bowie
Isaac Asimov
Ricky Gervais
Paul Giamatti
Brian Eno
Frank Zappa
Omar Sharif
Stephen Soderbergh
Gene Wilder
Joss Whedon

“We may observe that the government in a civilized country is much more expensive than in a barbarous one; and when we say that one government is more expensive than another, it is the same as if we said that that one country is farther advanced in improvement than another. To say that the government is expensive and the people not oppressed is to say that the people are rich.”

Adam Smith, who must have been some kind of leftie or something. 
   
Made in ca
Buttons Should Be Brass, Not Gold!






Soviet Kanukistan

Interesting point about how the strength of one's instinct to help is inversely proportional to the number of bystanders. While there is certainly truth that the feeling of distributed responsibility blunts the feeling of personal responsibility - these days, you could rush to help someone, only to be slapped with a lawsuit (for being incompetent, causing injury or distress or some equally frivilous reason). Considering the risk that one would incur by being a good samaritan, current societal norms also blunt the feeling of personal responsibility.

While I believe that everyone would like to help out, it is the sad reality that often, the fear of the risk that action would incur outweighs any altruistic feelings.

And yes, I believe that atheists are generally moral. The caveat is that no system of belief is without its sociopaths and crazies.

This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2008/08/15 15:12:36


 
   
Made in us
5th God of Chaos! (Yea'rly!)




The Great State of Texas



And yes, I believe that atheists are generally moral. The caveat is that no system of belief is without its sociopaths and crazies.


True words there.

-"Wait a minute.....who is that Frazz is talking to in the gallery? Hmmm something is going on here.....Oh.... it seems there is some dispute over video taping of some sort......Frazz is really upset now..........wait a minute......whats he go there.......is it? Can it be?....Frazz has just unleashed his hidden weiner dog from his mini bag, while quoting shakespeares "Let slip the dogs the war!!" GG
-"Don't mind Frazzled. He's just Dakka's crazy old dude locked in the attic. He's harmless. Mostly."
-TBone the Magnificent 1999-2014, Long Live the King!
 
   
Made in us
[ARTICLE MOD]
Fixture of Dakka






Chicago

Catholic arch-dioceses are having to declare bankruptcy due to lawsuits brought against them for repeat and institutionalized child molestation, and you have the gall to ask if athiests can be moral?

Perhaps a better question is, "can Christians be moral?"

More people have been killed, maimed and tortured in the name of Christ than for any other reason.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2008/08/15 16:03:04


   
Made in us
Fireknife Shas'el





A bizarre array of focusing mirrors and lenses turning my phrases into even more accurate clones of

sebster wrote:Can I also ask ‘are all people of faith dogmatic and incapable of independent thought?’ Or would that be an offensive, ignorant stereotype?


Nah, I'm a sheep. Baaaaah.

But seriously, as much as this is a fun stereotype, why would anyone seriously believe this? It's like asking if someone who's Democrat or Republican believed in each and every bullet point in their candidate's, or even party's, platform. Or any other large group with a certain set of beliefs. Of course, I know you don't mean "all" but from personal experience I'd go as far as to say not even most religious people are frothing at the mouth with dogma.

But yeah, it's a pretty sweet stereotype. It's like the stereotype of nerds and geeks. Stereotypes are fun baits you can use to draw out the most heroic defenders of their group. These people may claim not to BE the stereotype, but in their vigilance to prove that, they are.

WARHAMS WARHAMS WARHAMS WARHAMS WARHAMS WARHAMS WARHAMS WARHAMS WARHAMS WARHAMS WARHAMS WARHAMS WARHAMS WARHAMS WARHAMS WARHAMS WARHAMS

2009, Year of the Dog
 
   
Made in us
Longtime Dakkanaut



NoVA

Redbeard wrote:More people have been killed, maimed and tortured in the name of Christ than for any other reason.
Care to back that up? 'Cause I'd wager more have been killed for LAND than for every other thing put together. People have only been "killed in the name of Christ" for the past 2000 years. There were several HUNDRED millenia before that.

And Stalin killed 20M alone. That certainly wasn't in the name of Christ. How about Alexander? Or Genghis? Or Darius? Or the natives of the Americas?

So you'll need more than the atheist quotebook to sell me on that fallacy. Let's get some perspective.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2008/08/15 18:32:27


 
   
Made in de
Dominating Dominatrix






Piercing the heavens

Yeah, dienekes has a point there. Sure, the crusades and stuff were ugly, but humanity as a whole still had a head start before christianity kicked in.

To come back to the original question, I have a feeling that organized religion can a much more fertile breeding ground for immorality than atheism. I'm not even talking about the crusades and terrorism here, but christian groups who fight against homosexuality and people with different skin color than theirs.
   
Made in us
[ARTICLE MOD]
Fixture of Dakka






Chicago

dienekes96 wrote:
Redbeard wrote:More people have been killed, maimed and tortured in the name of Christ than for any other reason.
Care to back that up? 'Cause I'd wager more have been killed for LAND than for every other thing put together. People have only been "killed in the name of Christ" for the past 2000 years. There were several HUNDRED millenia before that.

And Stalin killed 20M alone. That certainly wasn't in the name of Christ. How about Alexander? Or Genghis? Or Darius? Or the natives of the Americas?

So you'll need more than the atheist quotebook to sell me on that fallacy. Let's get some perspective.


Stalin killed 20 Million, that's true. Ghengis killed his fair share (although, a lot less than commonly thought).

But, I'm not claiming that more have been killed for Chirst than all other reasons combined, but more than any other single reason. Stalin's 20 million is a drop in a bucket compared to all the native americans and africans that were killed as heathens, all the loses of the crusades, all those killed in the early heresies, not to mention the christian-on-christian wars throughout Europe between 1400-1800 about whose approach to the faith was right.

And, dienekes96 is also correct, that land (and other resources) are probably the "real" reason. But, the justification in many many cases has been that we're doing what we're doing to bring Christianity to the heathens. Yes, the Spanish wanted the gold in South America. But, what was their justification? It wasn't "we're greedy", it was that the natives needed to be converted. The 'real' reason that the crusades took place was because there were too many young, landless nobles in Europe, and they'd be fighting for land in Europe if they weren't directed elsewhere. But, the 'given' reason was to defeat the infidels in the name of Christ.

And, this is my point. Christians have no room to throw accusations about the morality of anyone else. Christ has been used as a justification for so many atrocities, how can you claim to be so superior as to judge my code of ethics? Even today the Catholic church is STILL turning a blind eye to their ingrained pedophilia problem. They're saying one thing, and still covering for the priests that are raping children. And you question my morals?

   
Made in us
Dwarf High King with New Book of Grudges




United States

Atheism, Christianity, and any other doctrine of faith (yes, atheism is a faith: the belief in the absence of a god is still a belief) all run into the same problem: they are bound to be exploited as a means of developing certainty.

On the face of it there is nothing wrong with believing in a god (or rejecting that belief); the trouble comes when you become certain that your belief is somehow superior to that of others. All people are guilty of this assumption at some point in their lives, but some are more obvious in it than others. It is easy to see people like Jerry Falwell and realize they believe in their own divine purpose; they literally come right out and say it. Others are more subtle; more concious of how fanatacism is characterized. Richard Dawkins falls into this category. His book The God Delusion reads very much like the gosepl according to Dawkins, and is replete with the kind of logical misteps one expects from a true believer. Among the worst are: his assumption that logical thought is the sole purvey of science, his characterization of the opponents of natural selection as "unimaginative" while exhibiting the very same lack of imagination in his treatment of a (criminally narrow) definition of religion, and his general failure to recognize the seperation between meaning and information. This is not to say that atheism is somehow inferior to more conventional religions. Indeed, my point is that they really lie on equivalent ground.

What does this mean in terms of the original question? Simple, atheists can be moral in precisely the same way as and other person of faith. Unfortunately, this opens them up to exactly the same type of systemic weaknesses. An atheist is just as likely to apply an innapropriate level of certainty when regarding his own judgment as any other person of faith (a term which is inclusive of all people).

All of these ideas which we have been discussing (religion, atheism, and morality) are nothing more than systems of narative through which people give meaning to their lives. As life goes on we are universally forced to bring new elements into line with our personal naratives. Healthy individuals are capable of recognizing, and coping with, the fact that they do not have absolute control over this process; they work in concert with the world around them to procude a productive system of meaning. Other people are not so enlightened. They see their own perception as being correct in an absolute sense. They seek to change the world without ever opening to change in themselves. These are the fanatics of the world, and they are positively delusional.

Life does not cease to be funny when people die any more than it ceases to be serious when people laugh. 
   
Made in us
5th God of Chaos! (Yea'rly!)




The Great State of Texas

Redbeard wrote:Catholic arch-dioceses are having to declare bankruptcy due to lawsuits brought against them for repeat and institutionalized child molestation, and you have the gall to ask if athiests can be moral?

Perhaps a better question is, "can Christians be moral?"

More people have been killed, maimed and tortured in the name of Christ than for any other reason.

Except for the Communists, Nazis, Genghis Khan, Romans, and Muslim Jihads of course.

-"Wait a minute.....who is that Frazz is talking to in the gallery? Hmmm something is going on here.....Oh.... it seems there is some dispute over video taping of some sort......Frazz is really upset now..........wait a minute......whats he go there.......is it? Can it be?....Frazz has just unleashed his hidden weiner dog from his mini bag, while quoting shakespeares "Let slip the dogs the war!!" GG
-"Don't mind Frazzled. He's just Dakka's crazy old dude locked in the attic. He's harmless. Mostly."
-TBone the Magnificent 1999-2014, Long Live the King!
 
   
 
Forum Index » Off-Topic Forum
Go to: