Total Posts:129|Showing Posts:1-30|Last Page
Jump to topic:

Does Morality Depend on Religion?

Osiris
Posts: 265
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/4/2009 5:18:16 PM
Posted: 7 years ago
This is a topic in my online philosophy class that we have to write about. The class is about contemporary moral issues and should be rather interesting. My stance is that morality and religion are independent. I think the desire to be a moral good human being is an innate sense and not contingent on religion.

I'd like to get insight from people other than classmates online.
"Common sense is not so common." -Voltaire
Volkov
Posts: 9,765
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/4/2009 5:26:57 PM
Posted: 7 years ago
Morality in no way depends on religion as an entity in and of itself.

That being said, religions can have a very influential factor in the creation and passing of morality to the next generation; but this is simply because a religion is simply a social grouping. Any social group, ranging from families to secular communities to workplaces can and do have influence on morality.

So, in a way, morality does depend on religion, but only the religion as a social group; the religion as a belief in a God doesn't make someone moral.

I hope this makes some sense, I might be explaining it wrong.
burningpuppies101
Posts: 1,268
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/4/2009 5:35:46 PM
Posted: 7 years ago
This question you ask is one that we can't answer, simply because we can't verify our answer and know that it be true.

It depends on what you believe to be the source of morality. If you think it is derived from divine will, then by all means morality depends on religion. If you think that morality was a neccessary social construct that was created as a way of self preservation for rational beings, then no, it probably doesn't depend on religion quite that much. But religion can influence it.

The question you ask can't be answered, simply because the meaning of the terms have been debated for all of humanity.
Omnes te moriturum amant 

http://www.debate.org...
Osiris
Posts: 265
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/4/2009 5:38:42 PM
Posted: 7 years ago
At 9/4/2009 5:26:57 PM, Volkov wrote:
Morality in no way depends on religion as an entity in and of itself.

That being said, religions can have a very influential factor in the creation and passing of morality to the next generation; but this is simply because a religion is simply a social grouping. Any social group, ranging from families to secular communities to workplaces can and do have influence on morality.

So, in a way, morality does depend on religion, but only the religion as a social group; the religion as a belief in a God doesn't make someone moral.

I hope this makes some sense, I might be explaining it wrong.

Yeah I understand what you're saying. After reading that section my textbook, I gathered that the question is referring to the belief in God.
"Common sense is not so common." -Voltaire
I-am-a-panda
Posts: 15,380
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/4/2009 5:40:06 PM
Posted: 7 years ago
I would argue the opposite, a sense of morality must exist for a religion to function. Judaism was founded on the Ten Commandments. Presuming they were man-made (I would say very likely), then humans had a sense of morality before religion was made.

Religion is worshipping a God. You must do what he tells you. This is your morals. Someone must invent religions. Morals therefore precede religion.

Religion depends on Morality.

I have a feeling I may have this question 100% wrongly answered though D:
Pizza. I have enormous respect for Pizza.
Volkov
Posts: 9,765
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/4/2009 5:47:50 PM
Posted: 7 years ago
At 9/4/2009 5:38:42 PM, Osiris wrote:
Yeah I understand what you're saying. After reading that section my textbook, I gathered that the question is referring to the belief in God.

In that sense then, morality doesn't depend on religion. Belief in a God doesn't mean you're moral; your actions make you moral. If a person attacks and kills someone, but says God told them to, and that they believed in what God said, they're still not moral; the person that doesn't kill another is moral.

But, it is infinitely more complex than I'm making it. Morality, in my mind, is completely subjective; Hitler to us was immoral, but to those that believed in what he did, he was the most moral man on Earth.

But regardless, someone who professes belief in Hitler's ideals isn't necessarily moral to neo-Nazis, but someone who commits the actions would be.

So - morality is actions, not belief.
Osiris
Posts: 265
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/4/2009 5:50:25 PM
Posted: 7 years ago
Minimum conception of morality: "Morality is, at the very least, the effort to guide one's conduct by reason--that is, to do what there are the best reasons for doing--while giving equal weight to the interests of each individual affected by one's decision. As the name suggests , the minimum conception is a core that every moral theory should accept, at least as a starting point." --James Rachels

If this helps at all...I do understand that there are many definitions of what morality is. It's kind of hard to choose one uncontroversial one.
"Common sense is not so common." -Voltaire
LB628
Posts: 176
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/4/2009 7:04:56 PM
Posted: 7 years ago
Morality could depend on religion. It depends on the interpretation of what it means to be a moral person.

One thought to consider is that morality itself could be a religion I.E you obey moral laws, be they handed down by a god, or simply developed using reason, because you believe them to be true, and you desire to achieve their standard. That is obviously not the traditional definition of religion, but it is a very close thing.
GeoLaureate8
Posts: 12,252
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/4/2009 7:51:28 PM
Posted: 7 years ago
Morality is completely irrelevant to religion. Many people disagree and think that religion is the only way someone can be moral, but that is completely and utterly FALSE, and I can prove it.

If morality came from religion, people wouldn't pick and choose what to follow from the Bible. People will skip over the "stone the unbelievers" "destroy other nations" parts, and follow the teachings that they think is moral, based on THEIR OWN MORALITY. Anyone who thinks morals come from religion, is in denial.

If anything, religion is the source of immorality. Many of the 10 commandments are not moral and in the video, George Carlin debunks the 10 commandments. Telling people not to worship other gods, have other idles, or make statues because you are a JEALOUS God, that is NOT moral. Nor is commanding people to kill babies and annihilate nations.

It is in insult to humanity to think that we would be raging mad, psychopathic, killer rapists without a levitating space-daddy watching over us.

.
"We must raise the standard of the Old, free, decentralized, and strictly limited Republic."
-- Murray Rothbard

"The worst thing that can happen to a good cause is, not to be skillfully attacked, but to be ineptly defended."
-- Frederic Bastiat
JustCallMeTarzan
Posts: 1,922
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/4/2009 8:08:14 PM
Posted: 7 years ago
At 9/4/2009 5:18:16 PM, Osiris wrote:
This is a topic in my online philosophy class that we have to write about. The class is about contemporary moral issues and should be rather interesting. My stance is that morality and religion are independent. I think the desire to be a moral good human being is an innate sense and not contingent on religion.

Obviously not.

Consider:

If God commanded you to rape someone, would it be moral to do so?
Obviously not.
Kleptin
Posts: 5,095
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/4/2009 8:41:28 PM
Posted: 7 years ago
At 9/4/2009 8:08:14 PM, JustCallMeTarzan wrote:
At 9/4/2009 5:18:16 PM, Osiris wrote:
This is a topic in my online philosophy class that we have to write about. The class is about contemporary moral issues and should be rather interesting. My stance is that morality and religion are independent. I think the desire to be a moral good human being is an innate sense and not contingent on religion.

Obviously not.

Consider:

If God commanded you to rape someone, would it be moral to do so?
Obviously not.

I encountered this line of thinking in another topic. A hypothetical situation in which God actually revealed himself and was precisely the way the Bible describes.

The way I see it, if this occurs, then morality would be objective, and objective to God's standard. Any opinion we form on what constitutes a moral act should correlate with God's standard, or else we are defective in some way.
: At 5/2/2010 2:43:54 PM, innomen wrote:
It isn't about finding a theory, philosophy or doctrine and thinking it's the answer, but a practical application of one's experiences that is the answer.

: At 10/28/2010 2:40:07 PM, jharry wrote: I have already been given the greatest Gift that anyone could ever hope for [Life], I would consider myself selfish if I expected anything more.
Volkov
Posts: 9,765
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/4/2009 8:42:47 PM
Posted: 7 years ago
At 9/4/2009 8:41:28 PM, Kleptin wrote:
I encountered this line of thinking in another topic. A hypothetical situation in which God actually revealed himself and was precisely the way the Bible describes.

The way I see it, if this occurs, then morality would be objective, and objective to God's standard. Any opinion we form on what constitutes a moral act should correlate with God's standard, or else we are defective in some way.


I believe that is called "sin," no?
Kleptin
Posts: 5,095
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/4/2009 8:55:01 PM
Posted: 7 years ago
At 9/4/2009 8:42:47 PM, Volkov wrote:
At 9/4/2009 8:41:28 PM, Kleptin wrote:
I encountered this line of thinking in another topic. A hypothetical situation in which God actually revealed himself and was precisely the way the Bible describes.

The way I see it, if this occurs, then morality would be objective, and objective to God's standard. Any opinion we form on what constitutes a moral act should correlate with God's standard, or else we are defective in some way.


I believe that is called "sin," no?

Haha, yes, but I was thinking more along the lines of what JCMT wrote above. Even if God commanded you to sin, it would be moral.
: At 5/2/2010 2:43:54 PM, innomen wrote:
It isn't about finding a theory, philosophy or doctrine and thinking it's the answer, but a practical application of one's experiences that is the answer.

: At 10/28/2010 2:40:07 PM, jharry wrote: I have already been given the greatest Gift that anyone could ever hope for [Life], I would consider myself selfish if I expected anything more.
Volkov
Posts: 9,765
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/4/2009 8:58:54 PM
Posted: 7 years ago
At 9/4/2009 8:55:01 PM, Kleptin wrote:
Haha, yes, but I was thinking more along the lines of what JCMT wrote above. Even if God commanded you to sin, it would be moral.

I guess that is just the conundrum? If God commands it, it must be moral; which means that the genocides described in the Bible are all moral events.

So while we're down here, condemning mass murder, we're apparently going against God's will.
GeoLaureate8
Posts: 12,252
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/4/2009 9:22:52 PM
Posted: 7 years ago
"Is conduct right because the gods command it, or do the gods command it because it is right?" - Socrates

.
"We must raise the standard of the Old, free, decentralized, and strictly limited Republic."
-- Murray Rothbard

"The worst thing that can happen to a good cause is, not to be skillfully attacked, but to be ineptly defended."
-- Frederic Bastiat
Cerebral_Narcissist
Posts: 10,806
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/4/2009 11:50:32 PM
Posted: 7 years ago
At 9/4/2009 5:18:16 PM, Osiris wrote:
This is a topic in my online philosophy class that we have to write about. The class is about contemporary moral issues and should be rather interesting. My stance is that morality and religion are independent. I think the desire to be a moral good human being is an innate sense and not contingent on religion.


I'd like to get insight from people other than classmates online.

To argue that morality requires religion is to suggest that all atheists are sociopaths. Morality is primarily conditioning and programming. Trained limits of personal freedom that when breached trigger a fear or guilt response.

I'd wager that it may be easier to instill certain moral values with religion, but if someone is basically sane and was raised decently they will be 'moral'.

Ironically many religions do not strictly speaking truly teach a system of morals, by creating a set of God given laws you have simply have yourself a code of behaviour, not a code of ethics.
I am voting for Innomen because of his intelligence, common sense, humility and the fact that Juggle appears to listen to him. Any other Presidential style would have a large sub-section of the site up in arms. If I was President I would destroy the site though elitism, others would let it run riot. Innomen represents a middle way that works, neither draconian nor anarchic and that is the only way things can work. Plus he does it all without ego trips.
Cerebral_Narcissist
Posts: 10,806
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/4/2009 11:52:25 PM
Posted: 7 years ago
At 9/4/2009 8:08:14 PM, JustCallMeTarzan wrote:
At 9/4/2009 5:18:16 PM, Osiris wrote:
This is a topic in my online philosophy class that we have to write about. The class is about contemporary moral issues and should be rather interesting. My stance is that morality and religion are independent. I think the desire to be a moral good human being is an innate sense and not contingent on religion.

Obviously not.

Consider:

If God commanded you to rape someone, would it be moral to do so?
Obviously not.

The existence of a God essentially precludes any morality.
I am voting for Innomen because of his intelligence, common sense, humility and the fact that Juggle appears to listen to him. Any other Presidential style would have a large sub-section of the site up in arms. If I was President I would destroy the site though elitism, others would let it run riot. Innomen represents a middle way that works, neither draconian nor anarchic and that is the only way things can work. Plus he does it all without ego trips.
DATCMOTO
Posts: 6,160
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/5/2009 1:36:50 AM
Posted: 7 years ago
At 9/4/2009 5:18:16 PM, Osiris wrote:
This is a topic in my online philosophy class that we have to write about. The class is about contemporary moral issues and should be rather interesting. My stance is that morality and religion are independent. I think the desire to be a moral good human being is an innate sense and not contingent on religion.


I'd like to get insight from people other than classmates online.

1)Morality MUST be objective.
2)Moral objectivity can only reside with something eternal.

1) Is one action (the giving of flowers to an elderly relative) morally above another (genocide) action?
If yes, then how can said action be higher unless it is closer to or further away from a separate, universal standard?

2) Unless this objective standard exists outside of temporal reality, (eternity) how and where is it maintained? where does it reside? If humanity wiped itself out would there still be right and wrong?

In Conclusion, morality does not depend on religion but on GOD: THE Object.
The Cross.. the Cross.
Cerebral_Narcissist
Posts: 10,806
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/5/2009 1:39:36 AM
Posted: 7 years ago
At 9/5/2009 1:36:50 AM, DATCMOTO wrote:
At 9/4/2009 5:18:16 PM, Osiris wrote:
This is a topic in my online philosophy class that we have to write about. The class is about contemporary moral issues and should be rather interesting. My stance is that morality and religion are independent. I think the desire to be a moral good human being is an innate sense and not contingent on religion.


I'd like to get insight from people other than classmates online.

1)Morality MUST be objective.

I know I am going to regret this but why must morality be objective?
I am voting for Innomen because of his intelligence, common sense, humility and the fact that Juggle appears to listen to him. Any other Presidential style would have a large sub-section of the site up in arms. If I was President I would destroy the site though elitism, others would let it run riot. Innomen represents a middle way that works, neither draconian nor anarchic and that is the only way things can work. Plus he does it all without ego trips.
DATCMOTO
Posts: 6,160
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/5/2009 1:43:54 AM
Posted: 7 years ago
At 9/5/2009 1:39:36 AM, Cerebral_Narcissist wrote:
At 9/5/2009 1:36:50 AM, DATCMOTO wrote:
At 9/4/2009 5:18:16 PM, Osiris wrote:
This is a topic in my online philosophy class that we have to write about. The class is about contemporary moral issues and should be rather interesting. My stance is that morality and religion are independent. I think the desire to be a moral good human being is an innate sense and not contingent on religion.


I'd like to get insight from people other than classmates online.

1)Morality MUST be objective.

I know I am going to regret this but why must morality be objective?

Is one action (the giving of flowers to an elderly relative) morally above another (genocide) action?
If yes, then how can said action be higher unless it is closer to or further away from a separate, universal standard?
The Cross.. the Cross.
Cerebral_Narcissist
Posts: 10,806
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/5/2009 1:48:25 AM
Posted: 7 years ago
At 9/5/2009 1:43:54 AM, DATCMOTO wrote:
At 9/5/2009 1:39:36 AM, Cerebral_Narcissist wrote:
At 9/5/2009 1:36:50 AM, DATCMOTO wrote:
At 9/4/2009 5:18:16 PM, Osiris wrote:
This is a topic in my online philosophy class that we have to write about. The class is about contemporary moral issues and should be rather interesting. My stance is that morality and religion are independent. I think the desire to be a moral good human being is an innate sense and not contingent on religion.


I'd like to get insight from people other than classmates online.

1)Morality MUST be objective.

I know I am going to regret this but why must morality be objective?

Is one action (the giving of flowers to an elderly relative) morally above another (genocide) action?
If yes, then how can said action be higher unless it is closer to or further away from a separate, universal standard?

No I asked you a question.

Why must morality be objective?
I am voting for Innomen because of his intelligence, common sense, humility and the fact that Juggle appears to listen to him. Any other Presidential style would have a large sub-section of the site up in arms. If I was President I would destroy the site though elitism, others would let it run riot. Innomen represents a middle way that works, neither draconian nor anarchic and that is the only way things can work. Plus he does it all without ego trips.
DATCMOTO
Posts: 6,160
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/5/2009 2:30:22 AM
Posted: 7 years ago
At 9/5/2009 1:48:25 AM, Cerebral_Narcissist wrote:
At 9/5/2009 1:43:54 AM, DATCMOTO wrote:
At 9/5/2009 1:39:36 AM, Cerebral_Narcissist wrote:
At 9/5/2009 1:36:50 AM, DATCMOTO wrote:
At 9/4/2009 5:18:16 PM, Osiris wrote:
This is a topic in my online philosophy class that we have to write about. The class is about contemporary moral issues and should be rather interesting. My stance is that morality and religion are independent. I think the desire to be a moral good human being is an innate sense and not contingent on religion.


I'd like to get insight from people other than classmates online.

1)Morality MUST be objective.

I know I am going to regret this but why must morality be objective?

Is one action (the giving of flowers to an elderly relative) morally above another (genocide) action?
If yes, then how can said action be higher unless it is closer to or further away from a separate, universal standard?

No I asked you a question.

Why must morality be objective?
The Cross.. the Cross.
Puck
Posts: 6,457
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/5/2009 5:25:03 AM
Posted: 7 years ago
At 9/4/2009 5:18:16 PM, Osiris wrote:
This is a topic in my online philosophy class that we have to write about. The class is about contemporary moral issues and should be rather interesting. My stance is that morality and religion are independent. I think the desire to be a moral good human being is an innate sense and not contingent on religion.

When talking about morality and moral choices, a moral choice always presupposes a goal - is it moral (good) for whom (the individual). Most religions propose a standard of morality (a set of actions), religion is not a necessary component of however. The Bible is the Chrisitian standard, for example, it only matters to those that accept the basic premises contained within it, making it quite noticeably not a universal (objective) standard of morality.
DATCMOTO
Posts: 6,160
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/5/2009 12:50:57 PM
Posted: 7 years ago
At 9/5/2009 5:25:03 AM, Puck wrote:
At 9/4/2009 5:18:16 PM, Osiris wrote:
This is a topic in my online philosophy class that we have to write about. The class is about contemporary moral issues and should be rather interesting. My stance is that morality and religion are independent. I think the desire to be a moral good human being is an innate sense and not contingent on religion.

When talking about morality and moral choices, a moral choice always presupposes a goal - is it moral (good) for whom (the individual). Most religions propose a standard of morality (a set of actions), religion is not a necessary component of however. The Bible is the Christian standard, for example, it only matters to those that accept the basic premises contained within it, making it quite noticeably not a universal (objective) standard of morality.

The only 'basic premise' ANY Christian should accept is that mankind is utterly fallen and so completely untrustworthy.
This is why mankind's 'morality' changes like the weather.
This is why we understand that we CANNOT know what is good, what is evil.
Which is why we make Almighty God the OBJECT of our surrender.
Whether the Objective standard matters to you or not is irrelevant: It remains.
The Cross.. the Cross.
regebro
Posts: 1,152
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/5/2009 1:34:18 PM
Posted: 7 years ago
At 9/5/2009 5:25:03 AM, Puck wrote:
When talking about morality and moral choices, a moral choice always presupposes a goal - is it moral (good) for whom (the individual). Most religions propose a standard of morality (a set of actions), religion is not a necessary component of however. The Bible is the Chrisitian standard, for example, it only matters to those that accept the basic premises contained within it, making it quite noticeably not a universal (objective) standard of morality.

Sure, but it also says all SHOULD accept the basic premises, which makes it universal again.

Also, objective and universal are usually different things in metaethics.
So prove me wrong, then.
DATCMOTO
Posts: 6,160
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/5/2009 2:01:02 PM
Posted: 7 years ago
At 9/5/2009 1:34:18 PM, regebro wrote:
At 9/5/2009 5:25:03 AM, Puck wrote:
When talking about morality and moral choices, a moral choice always presupposes a goal - is it moral (good) for whom (the individual). Most religions propose a standard of morality (a set of actions), religion is not a necessary component of however. The Bible is the Chrisitian standard, for example, it only matters to those that accept the basic premises contained within it, making it quite noticeably not a universal (objective) standard of morality.

Sure, but it also says all SHOULD accept the basic premises, which makes it universal again.

Whether you accept or not does not change the Object.


Also, objective and universal are usually different things in metaethics.

But the Object is morality HIMSELF. Self existent: outside of time and creation.
The Cross.. the Cross.
JustCallMeTarzan
Posts: 1,922
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/5/2009 4:53:38 PM
Posted: 7 years ago
At 9/5/2009 1:43:54 AM, DATCMOTO wrote:

Is one action (the giving of flowers to an elderly relative) morally above another (genocide) action?
If yes, then how can said action be higher unless it is closer to or further away from a separate, universal standard?

Or.. if NO, then there is no objective morality. In fact, there are no such things as moral actions - only moral DESCRIPTIONS of actions. Morality is an emotive concept. Reality is a descriptive concept. The two do not refer properly, so there is not even a possibility objective morality since there need to be emotive agents to even foster the concept.

Appeal to God's law as a source of morality is just a subjective choice on the part of the actors... and Christians erroneously believe their moral system is superior to all others because it's written into the system that it is...
GeoLaureate8
Posts: 12,252
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/5/2009 5:17:07 PM
Posted: 7 years ago
At 9/5/2009 1:36:50 AM, DATCMOTO wrote:
In Conclusion, morality does not depend on religion but on GOD: THE Object.

At 9/5/2009 2:30:22 AM, DATCMOTO wrote:
Is one action (the giving of flowers to an elderly relative) morally above another (genocide) action?

So is something right because God commands it? Or does he command it because it is right?

‘You shall annihilate them - Hittites, Amorites, Canaanites, Perizzites, Hivites, Jebusites – as Yahweh your God commanded you.' - Deuteronomy 20.11,18

So you believe that genocide is moral because Yahweh says so, correct?

.
"We must raise the standard of the Old, free, decentralized, and strictly limited Republic."
-- Murray Rothbard

"The worst thing that can happen to a good cause is, not to be skillfully attacked, but to be ineptly defended."
-- Frederic Bastiat