Objective Morality and Atheism

spidergoat said:
Morality is not objective, but neither is it arbitrary. It follows from compassion and analysis about what is best for society and individual happiness.
Click to expand...
I agree with you until the end.......happiness is not necessarily the topmost priority of every individual; at least, not happiness for everyone

Tradition might be the topmost priority of certain individuals, thus their morals will be relative to what is best for protecting tradition. Even if it must be rigid and intolerant.

Cris said:
But that's not true. Take a statistical normal distribution of the things most societies hold to be good or bad and you will find massive agreement, i.e. murder, rape, torture, genocide, etc.
Click to expand...
I agree but this doesn't mean anything.

Of course people tend to agree, although that doesn't mean morality isn't subjective. If 99% of the people thought blue was the most beautiful color, there might be a pattern and a consistency and a statistical norm but it doesn't change the fact that this is an opinion


Cris said:
The only thing we have that has true value is life. Morality when viewed in its purest form simply says anything that promotes life is good and anything that detracts from life is bad. Whether gods exist or not is irrelevant to this truth.
Click to expand...
Although even this, and it's untrue objectively, is subject to perception. What is good for life and bad for life? Is all killing bad for life? Perhaps Stalin thought what we was doing was good for life.

Is multiplying like crazy good for life? In the end, one could argue that such habits will be bad for life. One could argue that population regulations, eugenics, and euthanasia adminstered effectively are good for life in the long run.

Nonsense, death is bad, life is good. These are objective facts.
Click to expand...
No, they aren't.
 
sam,

Whats wrong with being an animal?
Click to expand...
I give up, whats the answer? You have a personal experience to relate I assume. Remember theists are closer to the animal world since they are unable to determine morality form biological urges on their own.
 
Cris said:
since they are unable to determine morality form biological urges on their own.
Click to expand...

And science is what helps atheists to separate biological urges from morality? Which is why they put the moral imperative above biological causes of behaviour in society? :rolleyes:
 
Although atheism simply means the lack of belief in a deity, it seems rather contradictory for one to be an atheist and yet not a nihilist as well. The sad reality is that all purpose, and morality, and justice, and meaning to life are human-creations. Just like gods.


We can observe the diversity in atheist moral codes in history; everywhere from Stalin to Hitler to Marx.
 
I think freedom and individuality are beneficial and apparently our founders did too. Why does everybody have to be so goddamn codependent? If someone didn't want to frequent my business because they were offended by a nearby sign I wouldn't want their dumbasses in my establishment anyway.
 
Norsefire,

Of course people tend to agree, although that doesn't mean morality isn't subjective.
Click to expand...
Is that a problem somehow?

If 99% of the people thought blue was the most beautiful color, there might be a pattern and a consistency and a statistical norm but it doesn't change the fact that this is an opinion.
Click to expand...
I don’t really see how this example is related to the topic.

Remaining post text moved to the moraility thread.
 
Last edited:
Sam,

And science is what helps atheists to separate biological urges from morality? Which is why they put the moral imperative above biological causes of behaviour in society?
Click to expand...
I don’t think science come into this. I’m quite sure I can make rational moral decisions through normal social discourse without reference to anything science has to offer.

It is not clear where you are headed with this line of thought and I’m not sure how you will manage to demonize atheism again with this, which I assume is your intent, right?
 
lori,

I think freedom and individuality are beneficial and apparently our founders did too. Why does everybody have to be so goddamn codependent? If someone didn't want to frequent my business because they were offended by a nearby sign I wouldn't want their dumbasses in my establishment anyway.
Click to expand...
Well damn it, I totally agree with you on this.
 
Norsefire said:
Although atheism simply means the lack of belief in a deity, it seems rather contradictory for one to be an atheist and yet not a nihilist as well. The sad reality is that all purpose, and morality, and justice, and meaning to life are human-creations. Just like gods.


We can observe the diversity in atheist moral codes in history; everywhere from Stalin to Hitler to Marx.
Click to expand...

Atheists can draw their inspiration from many of the same places other people do, art, music, literature, science, love, politics...

Religious moral codes don't have a great track record, either. Look at witch burnings, suppression of science, anti-semitism, prohibitions on homosexuality, encouragement of celibacy for priests (which led to current and past sex crimes)...
 
Cris said:
Norsefire,

Is that a problem somehow?
Click to expand...
No, it simply means that moral could be anything.

I don’t really see how this example is related to the topic.
Click to expand...
I was demonstrating that although people tend to agree on morals, this doesn't mean that their opinions become facts, just like if people agree on th emost beautiful color.



spidergoat said:
Atheists can draw their inspiration from many of the same places other people do, art, music, literature, science, love, politics...
Click to expand...
Absolutely, I didn't say otherwise.

Religious moral codes don't have a great track record, either. Look at witch burnings, suppression of science, anti-semitism, prohibitions on homosexuality, encouragement of celibacy for priests (which led to current and past sex crimes)...
Click to expand...
Meh, in the eyes of the religious they are done for the greater good.
 
Norsefire said:
The sad reality is that all purpose, and morality, and justice, and meaning to life are human-creations.
Click to expand...

Why is that sad?
Aren't purpose, morality, and justice things to be celebrated, regardless of their origin?
 
Norsefire said:
I agree with you until the end.......happiness is not necessarily the topmost priority of every individual; at least, not happiness for everyone
Click to expand...

Do you mean that for some individuals, personal happiness is not the top priority?

So, for some individuals, it is more important that everyone else is happy, right?

Therefore, they are happiest when they help ensure the collective is happy, right?

Therefore, in order for these people to achieve happiness, they have to work towards the happiness of others.

Therefore, their priority is their own happiness, once again. Weird how that works out, eh?
 
Nope that isn't at all what I meant. It means that tradition or culture might be more important than personal happiness; these are the people who "sacrifice" because custom dictates. Or happiness might be important to them but they want their society to be pure.
 
S.A.M. said:
Saying something is good or bad is based on notions of right and wrong. These are not present in atheism. They are from religion and societies based on these religions.
Click to expand...

No. As others said, theism sometimes adopts certain moral standards, but it doesn't originate them.

S.A.M. said:
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?
Click to expand...

There are many forms of theism in which the gods are either immoral or amoral. Take Greek mythology for example, in which the gods were capricious and human-like. They were not regarded as the suppliers of morals.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top