Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

The atheists monopoly of true morality....

page: 2
36
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join

posted on Nov, 15 2012 @ 09:21 AM
link   
I don't see what religion or the lack there of has to do with morality. I don't believe atheists are the only ones with true morality and I also don't believe that there are no moral atheists.

I just don't believe they have much to do with each other. It's well known that every one is capable of being immoral. If you truly value doing the right thing, it's not because of your religion. A real believer doesn't ONLY refrain from immoral behavior from fear of going to Hell. It's the right thing to do, and most religions just happen to agree.

Who cares what instills your morals as long as you have them? It's not a contest.

Also, if you're going by an atheist view, people created religions along with the religious morals, so how could religious people's morals be any less valuable than an atheists?




posted on Nov, 15 2012 @ 09:38 AM
link   
reply to post by TKDRL
 


I can agree with that argument. Much is learned within the environment provided for us.

Well said.



posted on Nov, 15 2012 @ 09:53 AM
link   

Originally posted by TKDRL
reply to post by sheepslayer247
 


I dispute that actually. Have you ever even seen little kids? They smack each other, steal each other's toys, etc, until they get yelled at enough(if they are lucky enough to have parents that give a crap) to know it's probably not a good idea.

Morality is learned, first from your parents, then as you grow older and go to indoctrination camp, I mean school, from society constructs. The difference is, morality learned from a bible thumper, it's wrong, because god will toss you in hell. Morality learned from an athiest, it's wrong because "insert secular logic here". Morality learned from a hippy, it's wrong, and karma will bite you in the ass for it. Etc.
edit on Thu, 15 Nov 2012 09:02:25 -0600 by TKDRL because: (no reason given)


I think that you're confusing morality with conformity. Churches and parents teach children how to behave within a certain society.

Property ownership is not an imperative morality. An alien civilization may, much like the Native Americans, look upon our society and wonder how we could possible think ourselves moral when we steal lives from animals and disrespect, rape and steal from the earth. How we push other people and species out of way, in the name of property ownership, building fences and walls to keep others out of our self made prisons.

"Do unto others" seems to be a timeless sentiment of human morality. Jesus didn't say it first, I doubt that Buddha said it first. It's like 2 + 2 = 4. Nobody "invented" that truth, it just is.



edit on 15-11-2012 by windword because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 15 2012 @ 10:07 AM
link   
reply to post by windword
 


If ownership is not imperative in morality, how could we possibly steal anything? See, even in the type of societies you are speaking of, one does own things. Your own life, products of your labor, your survival. If I take a raw piece of wood and work it into a bow, it is my bow. We do not reject private property ownership.

We are taught to respect all life, but not to the point to where we are not going to consume it to survive. We take an animal life, and use it for energy as nature intended. We use as much of the animal as possible. Yeah, I am half native



posted on Nov, 15 2012 @ 10:13 AM
link   

Originally posted by PerfectAnomoly
reply to post by phroziac
 


thanks for the swift reply Phroziac!

I assume you would classify yourself as an atheist?

PA


Youre welcome. And i dont exactly classify myself as an atheist. But i dont believe in the god of any religion either. I do consider myself to be a buddhist as well....i believe that "god" is all of the energy in the universe. Things create themselves, out of god...if you get what i mean? So we all have the ability of god like powers that we just mostly havent unlocked. I do have small evidences for it, but no proof.



posted on Nov, 15 2012 @ 10:29 AM
link   

Originally posted by TKDRL
reply to post by windword
 


If ownership is not imperative in morality, how could we possibly steal anything?


You're basing your moral logic on the existence of a perceived sin. It's like saying "If life weren't temporary how could we murder people?"



See, even in the type of societies you are speaking of, one does own things. Your own life, products of your labor, your survival. If I take a raw piece of wood and work it into a bow, it is my bow.


Does fruit belong to the tree? Are animals stealing when they forage food? The bow that you carved came from a tree and will always belong to the earth, not to you.



We do not reject private property ownership.


Jesus did. Jesus promoted communal living, where the society administered from the cumulative wealth of it's members works and goods, distributing to each individual, fairly and according to their needs.



We are taught to respect all life, but not to the point to where we are not going to consume it to survive. We take an animal life, and use it for energy as nature intended. We use as much of the animal as possible.


You are taught by who? Someone who has access to ultimate morality?


Yeah, I am half native



CHIEF SEATTLE'S LETTER

"The President in Washington sends word that he wishes to buy our land. But how can you buy or sell the sky? the land? The idea is strange to us. If we do not own the freshness of the air and the sparkle of the water, how can you buy them?

Every part of the earth is sacred to my people. Every shining pine needle, every sandy shore, every mist in the dark woods, every meadow, every humming insect. All are holy in the memory and experience of my people.

We know the sap which courses through the trees as we know the blood that courses through our veins. We are part of the earth and it is part of us. The perfumed flowers are our sisters. The bear, the deer, the great eagle, these are our brothers. The rocky crests, the dew in the meadow, the body heat of the pony, and man all belong to the same family.

www.barefootsworld.net...



posted on Nov, 15 2012 @ 10:38 AM
link   
reply to post by windword
 


Well, I disagree. And why would I care what jesus says or teaches? I am not catholic or christian. My people predated him. Rejecting land ownership is not the same as rejecting private ownership of everything.

Seems like you are projecting onto natives. Even with the rejection of land ownership, we had bloody wars between tribes over land occupation. We are not some perfect coombuya peaceful beings or something. We had our own flaws, still do.
edit on Thu, 15 Nov 2012 10:47:52 -0600 by TKDRL because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 15 2012 @ 12:04 PM
link   
reply to post by TKDRL
 


I think you're missing the point. Morality isn't owned or invented by the religious. The religious don't have a private party line to god's inside land line phone, while the rest of us get his voicemail.

Many times, the religious get it (morality) completely wrong.


edit on 15-11-2012 by windword because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 15 2012 @ 12:22 PM
link   

Originally posted by Ireminisce


Also, if you're going by an atheist view, people created religions along with the religious morals, so how could religious people's morals be any less valuable than an atheists?

When a religious person tries to push their religious morals upon people who disagree.

They are letting something from outside themselves to dictate what they believe even if that person believes in a distorted or misguided fashion, rather than use their own intellect to decide what is moral or not.

Besides one very important fact, the bible is not very moral, disagree?
Read it!



posted on Nov, 15 2012 @ 12:22 PM
link   
double post
edit on 15-11-2012 by Toadmund because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 15 2012 @ 12:26 PM
link   
reply to post by windword
 


I guess I was missing your point, I can agree with that totally.



posted on Nov, 15 2012 @ 12:33 PM
link   

Originally posted by phroziac

Youre welcome. And i dont exactly classify myself as an atheist. But i dont believe in the god of any religion either. I do consider myself to be a buddhist as well....i believe that "god" is all of the energy in the universe. Things create themselves, out of god...if you get what i mean? So we all have the ability of god like powers that we just mostly havent unlocked. I do have small evidences for it, but no proof.

I'd like to join your 'religion'
I just don't call it god, I call it 'Universe', the Universe created us and doesn't care what happens to us, just like real life indicates.
And the force is that which is contained in atoms.

One does not have to believe in a biblical god to be amazed at it all.



posted on Nov, 15 2012 @ 12:33 PM
link   

Originally posted by TKDRL
reply to post by sheepslayer247
 

I dispute that actually. Have you ever even seen little kids? They smack each other, steal each other's toys, etc, until they get yelled at enough(if they are lucky enough to have parents that give a crap) to know it's probably not a good idea.

Morality is learned ...


I meet you half way.


Some things are inbuilt to our species I suspect. Like being social and having a general desire not to kill each other. Though I suspect we also have various constructs that have come in and out of fashion such as 'we should kill X type of person for Y reason.' Religion is one of those constructs.

In defense of religious people oddly ... To be honest I suspect the vast majority of them don't actually think about this topic very much, and therefore jump to (seemingly) common sense responses when queried on it. A lot of religions claim an entity introduced morality or at least a set of 'right and wrong' guidelines which is an enticing thought.

To me, Religion as a moral construct isn't superior to any other construct yet people still try to define it as 'truth'. I suspect too many people let their moral construct dictate their morals without actually wondering who built it, why they built it, and why an awful lot of it sounds like it was philosophically produced thousands of years ago.



posted on Nov, 15 2012 @ 12:34 PM
link   
reply to post by Toadmund
 


All I'm saying is that It's arrogant to believe your morals are better or purer just because you aren't religious. Much in the same way it's arrogant to believe your morals are more pure because you are religious. I just think it's silly. Like I said, it's no contest. Live and let live. No one is better than anyone else. We all believe what we believe in order to get by.



posted on Nov, 15 2012 @ 12:41 PM
link   

Originally posted by Ireminisce
Also, if you're going by an atheist view, people created religions along with the religious morals, so how could religious people's morals be any less valuable than an atheists?


I look it more as that people let religious constructs inform their morals.

Atheists, in general, investigate and find morality without an invisible hand to punish or guide them. They might read from religious books, but they don't take them at face value.

I just see some parts of religious morality being based on a different understanding of the world.


Originally posted by Ireminisce
reply to post by Toadmund
 

All I'm saying is that It's arrogant to believe your morals are better or purer just because you aren't religious. Much in the same way it's arrogant to believe your morals are more pure because you are religious.


Some of my best friends are arrogant! >.<

Its foolish to assume that your morality is awesome because you're an Atheist, but that isn't really the argument I feel? OP can maybe clarify but I guess the OP was making a direct statement to religious people who claim that morality stems from religion ... basically that a moral Atheist is putting more thought and investigation in.

It's a subtle difference but that's how I read it.



posted on Nov, 15 2012 @ 12:41 PM
link   
reply to post by Ireminisce
 


Yes, people are wrong a lot, and so is religion.

You are right, one is usually not much more right than the other.
It is up to you to decide what is right or wrong ultimately.



posted on Nov, 15 2012 @ 12:43 PM
link   
Its not really sensible to generalise i don't think. It depends on the level of empathy the person has. It varies from person to person.

Morality is basically comparative judgements about suffering. Thats why we dont have moral rules about the treatment of inanimate objects. They don't suffer (as far as we know).

You need to be able to empathise with the suffering of others in order to make instinctive moral judgements that would be recognisably considered 'good'.

Not everybody would necessarily feel their way correctly to moral judgements in the absence of some form of explicit moral conditioning/tuition. Some would but some need a fair bit of behavioural reinforcement to get the message and some never do (these people are headed for jail or government depending on their intelligence/sneakiness).

If we could have a common world wide agreed morality (separated from religion) that could be taught to those that don't get it instinctively it would help make the world a better place.

There is a good TED talk by Sam Harris about this.



posted on Nov, 15 2012 @ 12:49 PM
link   
reply to post by Pinke
 


I like how you put it. It comes off less arrogant that way. . I do see your point that an atheist lives by their morals purely because it's what they believe is right, but that doesn't mean that some religious people don't do the same.



posted on Nov, 15 2012 @ 12:49 PM
link   
reply to post by PerfectAnomoly
 




I therefore propose that atheists pratice true morality... not morality born out of threats and promises....

True morality comes from accessing the deepest aspects of Intuition, inner depths, and out of Selflessness and Enlightenment.

Morality is relative to the times, cultures, person, etc. There is a surface level culturally agreed upon morality, and there is a deep inner True Morality that can only be accessed through knowing thyself, plunging the depths in meditation, and so forth. Whether an Atheist or Religious accesses the inner depths really does not matter as they will both find the same thing.

Religion itself has an Exoteric Outer shell ......and an Esoteric Inner core. The inner core is all about selflessness, Enlightenment, plunging the depths, the death of bias and division, seeing all perspectives equally. It's the destruction of the bias bubble that everyone has, even Atheists.

It's just the outer shell saying you need religion of morality. The Inner core is saying that inherent in everyone, in the depths of each one, there is an access point to true Enlightened, Selfless, morality.

Everything else is semantics.



posted on Nov, 15 2012 @ 02:20 PM
link   
Morality is relative. Social construct dictates most peoples morality.





new topics

top topics



 
36
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join