Glory Hallelujah

[Crunchy Cat]

Ladybug

If you do not believe in a deity who rewards or punishes, or in an afterlife to strive toward, where is the incentive for altruism?

Same place any other life form finds it. You do realize that humans
are not the only species on earth who exhibit altruisitic behavior.

Yes, the Enron executives have been punished. But how many other executives have done this and have gotten away with it?

More than punished, their financial and professional lives are over.
Quite a deter for any one else who wishes to follow in their
footsteps... not to mention the SEC is on a rampage of hunting
down more to punish (seen Yahoo finance lately?).

Not sure what you mean by "exploitation"

Taking selfish/unfair advantage of others for personal gain. For
example, theft, rape, murder, etc. are all forms of exploitation.

What I see in the world today is humans behaving more and more like our animal ancestors.

Well in that case, my animal ancestor was driving a $90,000 piece
of spectacular machinery down the road today while planning
electo-magnetic hypothesis to test with his co-workers over his
cell phone. Yep that's one of those ol' behaviors right there.

And it's depressing as hell.

Sorry . I hear prozac can help that though!

What do we have that separates us from the apes?

Too many things to list... but just for example:

* The ability to preserve other species.
* The ability to create and appreciate a multitude of artforms.
* The ability to understand our own behaviors.
* The advantages of being the most dominant species on the
planet.

 

[Raithere]

Originally posted by Ladybug
I do not think that all atheists are necessarily blind hedonists. Atheism does, however, allow for this. If you do not believe in a deity who rewards or punishes, or in an afterlife to strive toward, where is the incentive for altruism?

Sorry, but Christianity is no proof against hedonism. Shall I quote Martin Luther? “God does not work salvation for fictitious sinners. Be a sinner and sin vigorously.... Do not for a moment imagine that this life is the abiding place of justice; sin must be committed.” Or should we start polling the prisons and the brothels to find out the percentage of theists vs atheists?

Regardless I find ethics based upon the carrot and the stick principle to be… well, rather hypocritical. Isn’t a morality based upon fear of punishment or hope of reward intrinsically selfish? Where in such a scheme lies altruism?

~Raithere

 

[Raithere]

Re: Raithere: Some speculation

Originally posted by tiassa
I think it's a combination of two points which would sound very much like logic to a faithful redemptionist:

(1) The lack of an objective moral center allows for such equivocation that any reprehensible behavior can be "morally" justified.
(2) The presumption of "Original Sin" is also the presumption of the worst in people.

Therefore, the logical conclusion is that the rejection of the moral center of the Universe will, by proxy of man's tendency toward sin, lead eventually to blind hedonism and eventually the triumph of Satan.

I get the argument but it’s in such dire contrast to the reality that it’s always a slap in the face. Point of fact about the only behavioral difference I can see between theistic and atheistic populations here in the U.S. is what they do on Sunday (provided of course, there isn’t a big game on) and those idiotic, little, silver fish on the back of their cars. Of course, I find the little emblems particularly useful for identifying the type of person who just blasted the horn and gave the finger to the little old lady who was too slow at the green light or taking a census at the local porn shop.

~Raithere

 

[Tiassa]

You won't find me arguing against you on that

I agree completely. So let's call that post of mine encyclopedic, an assertion for others using you as a platform ... oh, hell ... I'm using too many people as tools lately.

Anyway ... er ... yeah.

:m:,
Tiassa

 

[Raithere]

afterthought

It's late, but I had to add this as well. From the extraordinary brilliance of Bill Hicks:

“I did that joke in Alabama, in Fife, and these three rednecks met me after the show, "Hey, buddy! C'mere! Mr. Funny-man, c'mere!"
"Hey, buddy, we're Christians, and we don't like what you said."

"So then forgive me." Anyway, later, as I was hanging in the tree... “

~Raithere

 

[Raithere]

Re: You won't find me arguing against you on that

Originally posted by tiassa
I agree completely. So let's call that post of mine encyclopedic, an assertion for others using you as a platform ... oh, hell ... I'm using too many people as tools lately.

LOL!
I've been called a tool before but usually in a different context.

Use away... and that goes for anyone. Just remember I can be a sharp tool at times.

~Raithere

 

[Ladybug]

I understand where everyone is coming from here, and I really have no problem if someone chooses not to believe in a god. But let me tell you where I am coming from.

I teach in an inner city school, and every day I see behavior that is reprehensible, to put it mildly. A lack of consequence to poor choices encourages additional poor choices. Example: If a student swears in class, and gets no real punishment, it does not deter the behavior, and perhaps next time, that student will do something a little worse, until eventually that student will be fighting, skipping classes, etc.

Now I realize that not everyone who can get away with things chooses to do so. There are some students who choose to behave, even without a threat of real punishment. But let us say that the vast majority could use the paddle (would that that was still an option -- great deterrent).

I think the same principles apply to religion. If there is no threat of consequence to bad behavior in life, many will take the opportunity to behave as they wish. Some will not, and I think that most who post here fall in the second category, by the way.

Cat, can you give me an example of altruistic behavior in other species? Aside from a mother protecting her offspring, which falls into the whole evolution thing, not altruism, I can't think of anything. Oh, and I would be surprised if the Enron execs weren't in some other high position in a short time. U.S. companies have a lengthy history of hiring those who have done bad things.

On the news last night: U.S. is outsourcing many things to India, such as computer programming and support. Why? It's cheaper. A programmer here has a $60,000 salary, and in India, they get $6,000 a year. Where does that savings go? The prices have not dropped, yet they save a bundle. Top level execs must be pocketing it. It's not illegal, but it is VERY selfish!

 

[Crunchy Cat]

Ladybug

I teach in an inner city school, and every day I see behavior that is reprehensible, to put it mildly. A lack of consequence to poor choices encourages additional poor choices. Example: If a student swears in class, and gets no real punishment, it does not deter the behavior, and perhaps next time, that student will do something a little worse, until eventually that student will be fighting, skipping classes, etc.

Inner-city children's behaviors are typically the result of a poor
socio-economic environment. It's unfortunate.

Now I realize that not everyone who can get away with things chooses to do so. There are some students who choose to behave, even without a threat of real punishment. But let us say that the vast majority could use the paddle (would that that was still an option -- great deterrent).

Yep it would. Unfortunately society currently deems it abusive
for the teacher to use violence for the purpose of behavioral
correction. A 'bad' child will eventually grow up and runs a higher
risk of being punished by society because of unacceptable adult
behaviors.

I think the same principles apply to religion. If there is no threat of consequence to bad behavior in life, many will take the opportunity to behave as they wish. Some will not, and I think that most who post here fall in the second category, by the way.

But there is a threat of consequence. It comes from society.
Children are always treated differently than adults, which is why
you are probably asserting this (your point of view is not focusing
outside your environment).

Cat, can you give me an example of altruistic behavior in other species? Aside from a mother protecting her offspring, which falls into the whole evolution thing, not altruism, I can't think of anything. Oh, and I would be surprised if the Enron execs weren't in some other high position in a short time. U.S. companies have a lengthy history of hiring those who have done bad things.

Sure,

Belding ground squirrel's (Spermophilus beldingi) emit an alarm call to warn all other other individuals about the presence of a
nearby predator. It is believed that giving an alarm call increases the chance that the predator will attack the caller. (From J. W. Bradbury and S. L. Veherencamp. 1998. Principles of Animal Communication. Sinauer, Sunderland, MA.)

Giving ones one life for the sake of the species... now that's some
extreme altruism!

On the news last night: U.S. is outsourcing many things to India, such as computer programming and support. Why? It's cheaper. A programmer here has a $60,000 salary, and in India, they get $6,000 a year. Where does that savings go? The prices have not dropped, yet they save a bundle. Top level execs must be pocketing it. It's not illegal, but it is VERY selfish!

I outsource 20% of my engineering team to India to ensure
our headcount can handle workload within the scope of budget
constraints. An India engineer costs 1/2 that of a U.S. engineer... NOT 1/10th. The benefits are being able to stay alive in a crappy
economy.