Can Atheists be Moral?

[BreezeWood]

Many theists believe it is clear-cut. Humans can only have opinions about morality, and no one’s opinion is any more valid than anyone else’s. This leads them to the conclusion that an objective source of morality must stand apart from, and above, humans. That source, they say, is God. Since atheists, reject God, atheists can have no basis for morality.

This is really two separate arguments: (1) that God is the source of objective morality and humans can learn morality from God and (2) that humans on their own have no way to know what is moral and what is not.

Can atheists be moral? - Atheist Alliance International

Ding made a good point. Can anyone be moral? He who is without sin step the fuck up.

Christianity is a religion for sinners.

.

Christianity is a religion for sinners.

only your 4th century version - the composite jesus of the 1st century was in fact just the opposite, the reward for those who deserve it.

 

[BreezeWood]

God seared right from wrong in to ALL of us...atheists included my dear.....

No, evolution did that. And didn't do a very good job of it, either. That's why it has taken us 200,000 years to finally puzzle out the more ethical and moral societies we have today. And much of that progress came just since the scientific enlightment.

respectfully disagree! We've had a conscience...at least since the 10 commandments time period!

Did you ever see the 10 commandments movie? When Moses was up on the mountain and gone for weeks, when he came back down I believe with the 10 commandments?, his tribe members had all gone bonkers cuz they thought he was never coming back.... or something of the sort.... it's been decades since I had seen the movie.... I remembered this part... the tribe had made a golden calf to worship and were doing all kinds of immoral things... the voice in the movie stated that, from this point onward, God SEARED right from wrong in to all of man's conscience....

I believe much of what is in the Bible coincides with science and evolutionary things, if you have an opened mind about it and can read further than the short story version in the Bible... ( it would be 10 miles plus high if the Bible covered all of humanity's journey if it was in detail.... it's simply a short story version)

So you and I, actually could be on the same page with this, to a certain degree...

at least to the point where we recognize that the Bible vs your version, both recognize that early on, we did not have a conscience or know right from wrong or it was not embedded in us until later, or in your version... learned over time... or evolved.

.

at least to the point where we recognize that the Bible vs your version, both recognize that early on, we did not have a conscience or know right from wrong or it was not embedded in us until later, or in your version... learned over time... or evolved.

we did not have a conscience or know right from wrong ...

that would not be true of the religion of antiquity the 4th century christian bible is based on - the life template from its inception has manifested its physical profile in all ways imaginable from that time forwards clearly demonstrating a controlled metaphysical objectivity for each succeeding phase of its development. from one generation to the next without interruption.

 

[sealybobo]

Every Christian proves they don’t really believe every time they masturbate. How could you knowing a god is watching and judging

Exactly. If we really believed that God shares in our experiences then we would behave differently in all things.

But it is a process, not a light switch. Life is a journey filled with ups and downs, backwards and forwards, ebbs and flows.

There are three possible states. We can be moving towards God, we can be moving away from God or we can be static.

How are you more moral that me? I mean besides you don't approve of abortion. Any other ways you are more moral?

When did I say I was more moral than you?

I don’t see myself as moral. Anyone who believes they are moral most likely aren’t.

Then this thread should actually be “Can anyone be moral?”?

...all the time.

No one is all good or all bad.

So atheists can be moral. Tell the person who started this thread.

Also tell them that theists can be immoral. He doesn't seem to know.

I still want to know can a theist be moral? According to you we are all sinners so you theists are no better than us atheists. That's what I'm getting out of this.

 

[sealybobo]

I said I verified it for myself

No, you didn't. You took it on faith and still do. When did you become so embarrassed of having faith?

I took it on faith to believe in God as I said, but the science in the Bible verified it. Your "faith" in evolution is unverifiable, e.g. humans from monkeys claim or birds from dinosaurs claim. Your "faith" in abiogenesis is unverifiable. Aliens is verifiable, but so far it's been no aliens. That follows abiogenesis is unverifiable. Thus, you're the one who is embarrassed beyond belief.

There is actual science to confirm the transition from birds to dinosaurs.


CC214: Transitional Birds

He is so far gone at times I think he is kidding.

 

[Meriweather]

I still want to know can a theist be moral? According to you we are all sinners so you theists are no better than us atheists. That's what I'm getting out of this.

Do theists and atheists agree on what is moral? Then the question becomes what is the level of morality each individual lives up to or attains.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

Your "faith" in abiogenesis is unverifiable

Utter , wishful thinking, Bible boy nonsense. Every shred of evidence we have ever collected on anything shows us a deteministic universe that follows physical laws. So abiogenesis is a foregone conclusion and requires no faith to believe. In the same manner, star formation was and is a foregone conclusion. In a point in space where there is a star, there once was no star and someday will probably be no star. At no point did scientists throw up their hands and say, "must be magic!" and they would have been foolish to do so. The only reason you undertake this foolish nonsense with the formation of life is because you buy into a very specific set of religious dogma, who you do by faith and faith alone.

Compare abiogenesis to your alternative, who you assert without a shred of evidence: magical horseshit.

I know you charlatans think it is somehow valid or effective to accuse everyone else of that of which only you are guilty, but it doesn't fool anyone. And it discredits you.

 

[sealybobo]

I still want to know can a theist be moral? According to you we are all sinners so you theists are no better than us atheists. That's what I'm getting out of this.

Do theists and atheists agree on what is moral? Then the question becomes what is the level of morality each individual lives up to or attains.

Lets look at what the guy originally wrote:

Many theists believe it is clear-cut. Humans can only have opinions about morality, and no one’s opinion is any more valid than anyone else’s. This leads them to the conclusion that an objective source of morality must stand apart from, and above, humans. That source, they say, is God. Since atheists, reject God, atheists can have no basis for morality.

This is really two separate arguments: (1) that God is the source of objective morality and humans can learn morality from God and (2) that humans on their own have no way to know what is moral and what is not.

It is not clear cut. Even theists disagree on morality. Muslims and Christians don't agree do they?

Even Christians disagree. Many different sects.

Just because this guys morality comes from one of 1000 different holy books does not mean he is a moral person. What it does mean is that atheists have no such holy book that they point to as their moral compass.

And this guy needs to realize human beings wrote his holy books. So his morality is based on the morality of sheep herders 1500 years ago or 7000 if he's jewish or 500 years ago if he's a muslim or 200 years ago if he's a Mormon.

He is right we have no holy books to refer to.

 

[hobelim]

Just because this guys morality comes from one of 1000 different holy books does not mean he is a moral person. What it does mean is that atheists have no such holy book that they point to as their moral compass.

And this guy needs to realize human beings wrote his holy books. So his morality is based on the morality of sheep herders 1500 years ago or 7000 if he's jewish or 500 years ago if he's a muslim or 200 years ago if he's a Mormon.

He is right we have no holy books to refer to.

lol... You once said that you go to church and pretend to pray hoping to get laid..What a guy!

Your morality would fit in with the morality of the great and wonderful snake oil salesman of ancient Egypt.

If you don't have a holy book, maybe you should write one? You can call it "how to remain single, and or miserable, for the rest of your life in one easy step".

 

[ding]

Exactly. If we really believed that God shares in our experiences then we would behave differently in all things.

But it is a process, not a light switch. Life is a journey filled with ups and downs, backwards and forwards, ebbs and flows.

There are three possible states. We can be moving towards God, we can be moving away from God or we can be static.

How are you more moral that me? I mean besides you don't approve of abortion. Any other ways you are more moral?

When did I say I was more moral than you?

I don’t see myself as moral. Anyone who believes they are moral most likely aren’t.

Then this thread should actually be “Can anyone be moral?”?

...all the time.

No one is all good or all bad.

So atheists can be moral. Tell the person who started this thread.

Also tell them that theists can be immoral. He doesn't seem to know.

I still want to know can a theist be moral? According to you we are all sinners so you theists are no better than us atheists. That's what I'm getting out of this.

What part of no one is all good or all bad do you not understand?

Go look somewhere else for absolution.

 

[BreezeWood]

What part of no one is all good or all bad do you not understand?

you need another book to read for your religion ...

 

[badger2]

That morality is a two-part argument assumes that the prisoner believes that god is a disembodied intentional force. Shults has shown in his figure 1.1 the depiction of a correlation between cognitive and coalitional tendencies that developed together in mutually reinforcing ways in the evolution of Homo sapiens. Shults describes the graph:

'The horizontal line indicates a continuum on which we can mark the tendency of persons to guess "human-like intentional force" when confronted with ambiguous phenomena in the natural environment....The continuum indicated on the vertical line registers how a person holds on to conventional modes of inscribing the social field....Sociographic prudes are strongly committed to the authorized social norms of their in-group, following and protecting them even at great cost to themselves. They are more likely to be suspicious of out-groups and to accept claims or demands that appeal to authorities within their own coalition. The sociographic promiscuity of those at the other end of the spectrum, on the other hand, leads them to be more open to intercourse with out-groups about alternative normativities and to the pursuit of new modes of creative social inscription. Such persons are also less likely to accept moralistic restrictions that are based on appeals to convention.

The evolutionary default is toward the integration of anthropomorphic promiscuity and sociographic prudery. In other words, human beings today are intuitively drawn into the biocultural gravitational field of the integrated tendencies in the lower left quadrant.'
(Shults, Iconoclastic Theology)

In the lower left quadrant of the graph in Figure 1.1 are the words, :"integrated theogonic forces," an d goes on to say that 'Whatever the unique conditions were that led some groups out of Africa, however, it seems clear that their survival was enhanced by the integration of theogonic forces.'

Thus, as Hodder (The Domestication of Europe) depicts the striated space of houses being placed in rows while esoteric knowledge began to forge protection rackets for theology, morality was simultaneously accompanied by manipulations of the fundamental illusions of Man, for instance, the illusion of not being dead once we already are. If absolute knowledge is death, Derrida goes even further to suggest that god (is [italics]) death.

 

[ding]

Morals, virtues and standards are interchangeable. Not all behaviors lead to equal outcomes. Some behaviors naturally produce better outcomes and some behaviors naturally produce worse outcomes. Therefore, the standards are natural standards. They exist in and of themselves. Independent of what we would have them be.

 

[ding]

That morality is a two-part argument assumes that the prisoner believes that god is a disembodied intentional force. Shults has shown in his figure 1.1 the depiction of a correlation between cognitive and coalitional tendencies that developed together in mutually reinforcing ways in the evolution of Homo sapiens. Shults describes the graph:

'The horizontal line indicates a continuum on which we can mark the tendency of persons to guess "human-like intentional force" when confronted with ambiguous phenomena in the natural environment....The continuum indicated on the vertical line registers how a person holds on to conventional modes of inscribing the social field....Sociographic prudes are strongly committed to the authorized social norms of their in-group, following and protecting them even at great cost to themselves. They are more likely to be suspicious of out-groups and to accept claims or demands that appeal to authorities within their own coalition. The sociographic promiscuity of those at the other end of the spectrum, on the other hand, leads them to be more open to intercourse with out-groups about alternative normativities and to the pursuit of new modes of creative social inscription. Such persons are also less likely to accept moralistic restrictions that are based on appeals to convention.

The evolutionary default is toward the integration of anthropomorphic promiscuity and sociographic prudery. In other words, human beings today are intuitively drawn into the biocultural gravitational field of the integrated tendencies in the lower left quadrant.'
(Shults, Iconoclastic Theology)

In the lower left quadrant of the graph in Figure 1.1 are the words, :"integrated theogonic forces," an d goes on to say that 'Whatever the unique conditions were that led some groups out of Africa, however, it seems clear that their survival was enhanced by the integration of theogonic forces.'

Thus, as Hodder (The Domestication of Europe) depicts the striated space of houses being placed in rows while esoteric knowledge began to forge protection rackets for theology, morality was simultaneously accompanied by manipulations of the fundamental illusions of Man, for instance, the illusion of not being dead once we already are. If absolute knowledge is death, Derrida goes even further to suggest that god (is [italics]) death.

No offense, but this is pretty stupid. From the atheist's vantage point morality exists because of evolutionary forces. But the reality is that even that argument confirms that morality offers a functional advantage over immorality. According to natural selection there are two main components; functional advantage and transfer of functional advantage to the next generation. So even natural selection confirms that morality is a standard which leads to success. Otherwise, according to natural selection, it would have been abandoned long ago. As mankind has gained more and more knowledge of his natural surroundings his desire for morality has not diminished. In fact, the more immoral we become the less satisfied we become.

 

[ding]

No offense, but this is pretty stupid. From the atheist's vantage point morality exists because of evolutionary forces. But the reality is that even that argument confirms that morality offers a functional advantage over immorality. According to natural selection there are two main components; functional advantage and transfer of functional advantage to the next generation. So even natural selection confirms that morality is a standard which leads to success. Otherwise, according to natural selection, it would have been abandoned long ago. As mankind has gained more and more knowledge of his natural surroundings his desire for morality has not diminished. In fact, the more immoral we become the less satisfied we become.

You really should just strive to become a better person. Try to stop munching on Jesus and lying in the name of God.. You can do it! er., at least you can try.

You might want to consider taking your own advice.

Your obsession over the religious beliefs of others is revealing.

 

[sealybobo]

Just because this guys morality comes from one of 1000 different holy books does not mean he is a moral person. What it does mean is that atheists have no such holy book that they point to as their moral compass.

And this guy needs to realize human beings wrote his holy books. So his morality is based on the morality of sheep herders 1500 years ago or 7000 if he's jewish or 500 years ago if he's a muslim or 200 years ago if he's a Mormon.

He is right we have no holy books to refer to.

lol... You once said that you go to church and pretend to pray hoping to get laid..What a guy!

Your morality would fit in with the morality of the great and wonderful snake oil salesman of ancient Egypt.

If you don't have a holy book, maybe you should write one? You can call it "how to remain single, and or miserable, for the rest of your life in one easy step".

Only I’m not miserable.

So what if I want to fuck a girl?

Do you know there are a lot of Jews who don’t believe in god? But they still belong to the Jewish community. Same with a lot of Greek Orthodox men. I know I’ve talked to a lot of them. They are all good husbands and fathers. They like Greek pussy and good luck finding one when you broadcast you’re an atheist.

The Scientologist I’m dating now knows I don’t believe.

 

[hobelim]

Just because this guys morality comes from one of 1000 different holy books does not mean he is a moral person. What it does mean is that atheists have no such holy book that they point to as their moral compass.

And this guy needs to realize human beings wrote his holy books. So his morality is based on the morality of sheep herders 1500 years ago or 7000 if he's jewish or 500 years ago if he's a muslim or 200 years ago if he's a Mormon.

He is right we have no holy books to refer to.

lol... You once said that you go to church and pretend to pray hoping to get laid..What a guy!

Your morality would fit in with the morality of the great and wonderful snake oil salesman of ancient Egypt.

If you don't have a holy book, maybe you should write one? You can call it "how to remain single, and or miserable, for the rest of your life in one easy step".

Only I’m not miserable.

So what if I want to fuck a girl?

Do you know there are a lot of Jews who don’t believe in god? But they still belong to the Jewish community. Same with a lot of Greek Orthodox men. I know I’ve talked to a lot of them. They are all good husbands and fathers. They like Greek pussy and good luck finding one when you broadcast you’re an atheist.

The Scientologist I’m dating now knows I don’t believe.

I understand. So you want to become a false person to a religious girl so that you can fuck her. Whats the big deal.

But the Jew, the Jews,

I know.

 

[sealybobo]

No offense, but this is pretty stupid. From the atheist's vantage point morality exists because of evolutionary forces. But the reality is that even that argument confirms that morality offers a functional advantage over immorality. According to natural selection there are two main components; functional advantage and transfer of functional advantage to the next generation. So even natural selection confirms that morality is a standard which leads to success. Otherwise, according to natural selection, it would have been abandoned long ago. As mankind has gained more and more knowledge of his natural surroundings his desire for morality has not diminished. In fact, the more immoral we become the less satisfied we become.

You really should just strive to become a better person. Try to stop munching on Jesus and lying in the name of God.. You can do it! er., at least you can try.

You might want to consider taking your own advice.

Your obsession over the religious beliefs of others is revealing.

Nah. It’s just one of the few things that fascinate me.

Politics, religion, movies, sports. You’ll notice us all over the boards.

It’s YOU who’s always on here. If not discussing with me I see you arguing or debating with many other people.

Why are you obsessed with the religious forum?

 

[sealybobo]

Just because this guys morality comes from one of 1000 different holy books does not mean he is a moral person. What it does mean is that atheists have no such holy book that they point to as their moral compass.

And this guy needs to realize human beings wrote his holy books. So his morality is based on the morality of sheep herders 1500 years ago or 7000 if he's jewish or 500 years ago if he's a muslim or 200 years ago if he's a Mormon.

He is right we have no holy books to refer to.

lol... You once said that you go to church and pretend to pray hoping to get laid..What a guy!

Your morality would fit in with the morality of the great and wonderful snake oil salesman of ancient Egypt.

If you don't have a holy book, maybe you should write one? You can call it "how to remain single, and or miserable, for the rest of your life in one easy step".

Only I’m not miserable.

So what if I want to fuck a girl?

Do you know there are a lot of Jews who don’t believe in god? But they still belong to the Jewish community. Same with a lot of Greek Orthodox men. I know I’ve talked to a lot of them. They are all good husbands and fathers. They like Greek pussy and good luck finding one when you broadcast you’re an atheist.

The Scientologist I’m dating now knows I don’t believe.

I understand. So you want to become a false person to a religious girl so that you can fuck her. Whats the big deal.

But the Jew, the Jews,

I know.

If she brought up faith I’d tell her I’m an agnostic but usually the first thing they ask is what do you do for a living.

If a guy believes in God is usually a low priority on women’s list. And the ones who it matters to, we wouldn’t end up fucking if belief mattered. I’ve only had believe matter once. The Pentecostal girl wouldn’t date me unless I went to her wacky church on sundays. But she still fucked the shit out of me on the first date. She really needed to get laid I wasn’t even trying to fuck her that night.

So if it were a high priority to the girl I wouldn’t lie and say I take the Bible literally. Most Christians today don’t anyways. Jesus was just a good dude.

 

[ding]

No offense, but this is pretty stupid. From the atheist's vantage point morality exists because of evolutionary forces. But the reality is that even that argument confirms that morality offers a functional advantage over immorality. According to natural selection there are two main components; functional advantage and transfer of functional advantage to the next generation. So even natural selection confirms that morality is a standard which leads to success. Otherwise, according to natural selection, it would have been abandoned long ago. As mankind has gained more and more knowledge of his natural surroundings his desire for morality has not diminished. In fact, the more immoral we become the less satisfied we become.

You really should just strive to become a better person. Try to stop munching on Jesus and lying in the name of God.. You can do it! er., at least you can try.

You might want to consider taking your own advice.

Your obsession over the religious beliefs of others is revealing.

Nah. It’s just one of the few things that fascinate me.

Politics, religion, movies, sports. You’ll notice us all over the boards.

It’s YOU who’s always on here. If not discussing with me I see you arguing or debating with many other people.

Why are you obsessed with the religious forum?

Where to start... I post in other rooms. Yes, I post here the most because I enjoy discussing things I believe in. When I didn't believe in them I didn't discuss them because it would have been illogical to do so.

 

[hobelim]

Just because this guys morality comes from one of 1000 different holy books does not mean he is a moral person. What it does mean is that atheists have no such holy book that they point to as their moral compass.

And this guy needs to realize human beings wrote his holy books. So his morality is based on the morality of sheep herders 1500 years ago or 7000 if he's jewish or 500 years ago if he's a muslim or 200 years ago if he's a Mormon.

He is right we have no holy books to refer to.

lol... You once said that you go to church and pretend to pray hoping to get laid..What a guy!

Your morality would fit in with the morality of the great and wonderful snake oil salesman of ancient Egypt.

If you don't have a holy book, maybe you should write one? You can call it "how to remain single, and or miserable, for the rest of your life in one easy step".

Only I’m not miserable.

So what if I want to fuck a girl?

Do you know there are a lot of Jews who don’t believe in god? But they still belong to the Jewish community. Same with a lot of Greek Orthodox men. I know I’ve talked to a lot of them. They are all good husbands and fathers. They like Greek pussy and good luck finding one when you broadcast you’re an atheist.

The Scientologist I’m dating now knows I don’t believe.

I understand. So you want to become a false person to a religious girl so that you can fuck her. Whats the big deal.

But the Jew, the Jews,

I know.

If she brought up faith I’d tell her I’m an agnostic but usually the first thing they ask is what do you do for a living.

If a guy believes in God is usually a low priority on women’s list. And the ones who it matters to, we wouldn’t end up fucking if belief mattered. I’ve only had believe matter once. The Pentecostal girl wouldn’t date me unless I went to her wacky church on sundays. But she still fucked the shit out of me on the first date. She really needed to get laid I wasn’t even trying to fuck her that night.

So if it were a high priority to the girl I wouldn’t lie and say I take the Bible literally. Most Christians today don’t anyways. Jesus was just a good dude.

Jesus was just a good dude? lol...Apparently many people didn't think so. He said some remarkable things and then just walked away. When astonished people who had many questions and gathered to hear more, he just went off somewhere to make out with Mary Magdalene or said something that sounded nutty.


They probably should have just asked him a specific question if they wanted a specific answer to something.