How can atheism have morality?

It seems nobody is addressing the atheists dilemma.

I never said you can't have subjective morality. But atheists think they're soulless animals with no objective standard of good.

Without any objective standard of good then all subjective morality is equally good. The subjective morality of a serial killer is just as good as the subjective morality of a guy that isn't a serial killer. In atheism, morality is relative to the observer.

This leads to modal collapse and lawlessness.

Tell me, how can you have morality without an objective standard of good when morality is defined as the distinction between good and evil?

originally posted by: gortex
a reply to: neoholographicpart2

Here's the definition of morality:

principles concerning the distinction between right and wrong or good and bad behavior.

Morality is not exclusive to religion , as a "non-believer" I have my own moral compass which guides my sense of right and wrong hence my opposition to the war in Ukraine and the slaughter in Gaza , they are both wrong but It surprises my how some religious folk seem supportive of at least one of them if not both.

Religion is good at preaching morals but followers don't always practice what it preaches , "Do unto others as you would have them do unto you" springs to mind.

If I raped and killed my neighbors wife and kids, I'd expect him to come after me with all he can muster. So yes, your analogy is a good one.

a reply to: neoholographicpart2

Morality does not necessarily require a belief in a deity or a religious framework.

Morality can be grounded in empathy, reason, social contracts, and a consideration for the well-being of individuals and societies.

People do not need to be religious to possess morality or be able to distinguish right from wrong.

a reply to: neoholographicpart2

I never said you can't have subjective morality. But atheists think they're soulless animals with no objective standard of good.

Good and evil are very human constructs.

Nature entertains no such delusions.

Then again humanity's ability to empathize is part and parcel where the human condition is concerned and kind of makes us who we are as a species.

Capable of great evil but with the ability to show empathy, mercy, and goodness, towards our fellow man should we choose to do so.

a reply to: NemesisB

Just providing a counterpoint.

No more no less.

Not my place to judge.

a reply to: Hecate666

Yes.

Some religious adherents can be dangerous slaves.

My family staged an intervention because they thought aspects of my schizophrenic experience was cult indoctrination and I was flooded with the demonic.

Oddly enough, it calmed down some of my more radical switching and helped me regain balanced and objective control over things.

It wasn't violent or cruel, it was just a time out in a safe place immune to external factors.

a reply to: neoholographicpart2

Think your question is flawed
Atheism in and of itself can’t have morals
Atheists can and clearly most do have morals.

Atheism teaches nothing, it only denies God
Religion, or most religions teach rules and values

Pretty sure all societies have laws and people to enforce those laws, otherwise, the whole system breaks down because people will mostly seek revenge

The question is killing the sacred cow

a reply to: neoholographicpart2

I think we have developed superior morality in some areas since the enlightenment. For example it was common in both Christianity and Islam for girls to be married off once they started menstruating, often to middle aged men.. My mother told me she was 9yo when she started.

We now abhor this practice and yet it was not one of the 10 commandments!

a reply to: andy06shake

If good and evil are just human constructs then you have to agree with what I'm saying.

In atheism there is no morality. Everyone's subjective morality is equally true and equally good. This leads to modal collapse and lawlessness.

A person can say sexual assault is what's moral to me. I'm a man and I have urges so there's no need to control those urges. In atheism, his subjective morality is equally true and equally good compared to anyone elses subjective morality.

This is why the Bible calls the antichrist the lawless one. When you think you're a soulless animal then you have no moral law.

a reply to: neoholographicpart2

I never said you can't have subjective morality. But atheists think they're soulless animals with no objective standard of good.

We don't understand the nature of reality so how can we understand the nature of the soul , is it God given or a product of the Universe that created us , the more we learn the more complex that answer is in my opinion.

Tell me, how can you have morality without an objective standard of good when morality is defined as the distinction between good and evil?

I think morality is a product of nurture not nature but as with religion we don't always follow what we've been taught.

a reply to: neoholographicpart2

If good and evil are just human constructs then you have to agree with what I'm saying.

There is no "if" about it.

Good and evil are human constructs and a creation of Man.

If you can prove otherwise please do so.

In atheism there is no morality. Everyone's subjective morality is equally true and equally good. This leads to modal collapse and lawlessness.

Sounds like opinion as opposed to fact.

A person can say sexual assault is what's moral to me. I'm a man and I have urges so there's no need to control those urges. In atheism, his subjective morality is equally true and equally good compared to anyone elses subjective morality.

Sexual assault is amoral no two ways about that, if in doubt go and get raped and see how you feel about it.

I can pretty much guarantee you won't be too chuffed about the experience.

This is why the Bible calls the antichrist the lawless one. When you think you're a soulless animal then you have no moral law.

Plenty of sexual assault in that book, incest, filicide, murder, rape, mass genocide, i could go on.

As to the antichrist well just like the book that mentions him, is a creation of man.

originally posted by: midicon
a reply to: neoholographicpart2

You are flat out wrong. There have been studies on little kids showing how they show empathy towards others.

Yeah because there's a moral code built into us, further insisting that nihilism is drastically wrong.

a reply to: neoholographicpart2

good and evil are just human constructs

So is religion, therefore religious morality is no different that of an atheist.

a reply to: cooperton

Monkey see monkey do cooperton is pretty much the colour of the day by my guess.

The way we are raised severely influences our ability to show empathy and distinguish right from wrong.

Show a child love and they will learn to love.

Show it the opposite and they will predominantly adopt that attitude.

originally posted by: andy06shake
a reply to: cooperton

Monkey see monkey do cooperton is pretty much the colour of the day by my guess.

The way we are raised severely influences our ability to show empathy and distinguish right from wrong.

Show a child love and they will learn to love.

Show it the opposite and they will predominantly adopt that attitude.

I was responding to a post that said that a child will do this naturally without influence. It shows it is engrained in us. Nature and nurture will define a developing person, not solely one or the other.

a reply to: cooperton

It's not engrained cooperton.

Children are not born with an inherent sense of good or evil.

Moral values and behaviors are learned and shaped through environmental influences like socialisation and experience.

Put it this way, deprive a child of normal social interaction, care, love, attention, and education, and it can have severe consequences for their physical, social, and cognitive development.

If in doubt see "feral humans" and how they tend to fair.

originally posted by: cooperton

originally posted by: midicon
a reply to: neoholographicpart2

You are flat out wrong. There have been studies on little kids showing how they show empathy towards others.

Yeah because there's a moral code built into us, further insisting that nihilism is drastically wrong.

I think life is meaningless in itself but we give it meaning or at least some kind of purpose.

I don't know about the term you use regarding a moral code being built into us. I think we are by nature empathetic but as others say nurture is just as important.

originally posted by: andy06shake
a reply to: cooperton

It's not engrained cooperton.

Children are not born with an inherent sense of good or evil.

Moral values and behaviors are learned and shaped through environmental influences like socialisation and experience.

If all moral values were learned from external cues, then you wouldn't have instances like this:



Our ability to know good and evil beyond what was dictated to us shows there is an objectivity to it. When we can still discern something as unjust even when the entire crowd is going for it, that shows there is some objectivity within us that can override what society has programmed into us.

a reply to: cooperton

If all moral values were leerning from external cues, then you wouldn't have instances like this:

How so, please elaborate?

What else could they be learning from if not external cues?

Somebody taught the poor sod to stand up to oppression, im apt to go with education or his parents, he did not simply decide to stand down a tank and lose because god told him to do so.

Our ability to know good and evil beyond what was dictated to us shows there is an objectivity to it.

So it is learned then as opposed to bestowed?

When we can still discern something as unjust even when the entire crowd is going for it, that shows there is some objectivity within us that can override what society has programmed into us.

Here is your problem there, large groups of people are generally only as smart as the loudest person in the crowd.

Humans in large groups are like cattle for the most part by my guess.

a reply to: neoholographicpart2

Atheists have no objective standard of good so there's no distinction between good and bad behavior so there can't be any morality in atheism.

For instance, if a sex trafficker says I do this because it feeds my family and that's what's morally good to me, then his behavior is no more good or evil than the behavior of someone that helps feed the homeless.

Babies as young as six months old can distinguish between good and bad and they are blank slates at that point in their lives.

www.bbcearth.com...

As for your example, a sex trafficker is not concerned about the welfare or wellbeing of the people that are being trafficked, right there that's bad because it's self-serving and lacks empathy.