Objective Morality and Atheism

[S.A.M.]

There is no common factor, they do not conform to any basic assumptions beside the non-existence of a God or other supernatural forces.

Yup. So any talk of atheist "traditions" is baseless.

 

[Pete]

Whats the common factor I should look for between an atheist from a Jewish society and a communist one?

Why should there be a common factor, other than the defining one?
Do you look for common moral beliefs among chess players?

 

[S.A.M.]

I have yet to see a poster that declares "you do not need to believe in checkmate to be good"

 

[Pete]

I have yet to see a poster that declares "you do not need to believe in checkmate to be good"

Now you have:
"You do not need to believe in checkmate to be good."

What's your point?

 

[S.A.M.]

That chess does not require you to have a moral belief in right or wrong.

 

[Pete]

And, like atheism, neither does it require you to not have a belief in right or wrong. It's independent.

 

[S.A.M.]

Except that theism does.

 

[Pete]

It's strongly correlated, yes.

 

[S.A.M.]

No, I mean theism does require people to have notions of right and wrong. Do you know any theist who does not have notions of morality associated with religion?

 

[Pete]

No, I mean theism does require people to have notions of right and wrong. Do you know any theist who does not have notions of morality associated with religion?

In practice, every theist group has a particular creed that includes moral rules. But it's not a necessary result of theism. There is nothing contradictory in believing in a God that doesn't require any particular standard of behaviour.

But, you were looking for commonality among atheists. You could start by looking for a shared creed, but you won't find one.

 

[S.A.M.]

There is nothing contradictory in believing in a God that doesn't require any particular standard of behaviour..

For example?

 

[Pete]

For example?

You can't imagine an omnipotent entity that doesn't give a crap what people do?

 

[S.A.M.]

Touche

 

[(Q)]

You'll find that most religious people are more flexible in their attitudes and hence have more inclusive societies. Atheists in known history have built exclusive intolerant societies.

Neither of those scenarios have been observed. The following twist on your statement are well known facts.

You'll find that most religious people are more inflexible in their attitudes and hence have more exclusive societies. Theists in known history have built exclusive intolerant societies

 

[spidergoat]

Yup. So any talk of atheist "traditions" is baseless.

There can be traditions that are atheistic in nature, which atheists may or may not subscribe to.

Anyway, I must apologize. I realized that the Catholic Church does not have fixed moral principles, other than the 10 commandments. Their highest authority is the Pope, who often decides what the moral opinion of Catholics must be. So in this case, a mere human has decided for others, so how is it better than what atheists do? At least we have the freedom to make up our own minds. Islamic scholars and prophets play a similar role. Can you be so sure all of them are in communication with God?

 

[S.A.M.]

So if the Pope decides evolution is compatible with genesis, the argument is over?

 

[tuberculatious]

He did that already didn't he?

 

[Cris]

Yup the news is about 13 years old.

POPE JOHN PAUL II EMBRACES EVOLUTION!! 1996

http://www.cuttingedge.org/n1034.html

 

[Cris]

sam,

Because now atheists no longer believe that moral beliefs supercede biological urges in civilised society?

Why are you so utterly thick in this regard? Atheists don't simply disregard their intellectual abilities and ability to reason and become animals just because they don't believe in religious fantasy.

 

[S.A.M.]

Whats wrong with being an animal?