Total Posts:58|Showing Posts:1-30|Last Page
Jump to topic:

Atheists, Where Does Your Morality Come From?

ChristianPunk
Posts: 1,710
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/16/2015 8:05:21 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
I know atheism is merely a lack of belief in God, so that doesn't have a system or set of laws. But what has influenced your morals or what philosophy do you take up that has built your morals?
Envisage
Posts: 3,646
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/16/2015 8:15:54 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 2/16/2015 8:05:21 PM, ChristianPunk wrote:
I know atheism is merely a lack of belief in God, so that doesn't have a system or set of laws. But what has influenced your morals or what philosophy do you take up that has built your morals?

I have embraced the abyss of nihilism. Feel welcome to join me.
ChristianPunk
Posts: 1,710
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/16/2015 8:21:23 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 2/16/2015 8:15:54 PM, Envisage wrote:
At 2/16/2015 8:05:21 PM, ChristianPunk wrote:
I know atheism is merely a lack of belief in God, so that doesn't have a system or set of laws. But what has influenced your morals or what philosophy do you take up that has built your morals?

I have embraced the abyss of nihilism. Feel welcome to join me.

Would you agree with Turgenev defining Nihilism as somebody who doesn't bow down to authority or take principles of faith?
Envisage
Posts: 3,646
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/16/2015 8:24:38 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 2/16/2015 8:21:23 PM, ChristianPunk wrote:
At 2/16/2015 8:15:54 PM, Envisage wrote:
At 2/16/2015 8:05:21 PM, ChristianPunk wrote:
I know atheism is merely a lack of belief in God, so that doesn't have a system or set of laws. But what has influenced your morals or what philosophy do you take up that has built your morals?

I have embraced the abyss of nihilism. Feel welcome to join me.

Would you agree with Turgenev defining Nihilism as somebody who doesn't bow down to authority or take principles of faith?

No. Nihilism has a lot of sub-sections to it. For the purposes of this OP, I am a moral nihilist. Thus I assert that no moral statement is "true" at the very least.
ChristianPunk
Posts: 1,710
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/16/2015 8:28:17 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 2/16/2015 8:24:38 PM, Envisage wrote:
At 2/16/2015 8:21:23 PM, ChristianPunk wrote:
At 2/16/2015 8:15:54 PM, Envisage wrote:
At 2/16/2015 8:05:21 PM, ChristianPunk wrote:
I know atheism is merely a lack of belief in God, so that doesn't have a system or set of laws. But what has influenced your morals or what philosophy do you take up that has built your morals?

I have embraced the abyss of nihilism. Feel welcome to join me.

Would you agree with Turgenev defining Nihilism as somebody who doesn't bow down to authority or take principles of faith?

No. Nihilism has a lot of sub-sections to it. For the purposes of this OP, I am a moral nihilist. Thus I assert that no moral statement is "true" at the very least.

If that be the case, are you open to allow certain said moral statements to carry into moral actions. Example. If no moral statement is true, then is there anything moral or immoral about a man who kills his wife and child because they gave him a headache? I'm not accusing you of anything, I just want to do a thought exercise.
Gentorev
Posts: 2,877
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/16/2015 8:30:08 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 2/16/2015 8:15:54 PM, Envisage wrote:
At 2/16/2015 8:05:21 PM, ChristianPunk wrote:
I know atheism is merely a lack of belief in God, so that doesn't have a system or set of laws. But what has influenced your morals or what philosophy do you take up that has built your morals?

I have embraced the abyss of nihilism. Feel welcome to join me.

Although i am not an atheist, I believe that the majority actually live by the law that is written in their hearts, and that is the law that they impose on the society around them. If they refuse to obey the very laws that they impose on others, then they condemn themselves.

Do they want their children to obey them or to spit in their face? Do they want their partner to jump into the cot with someone else? Do they want others to thieve from them? Do they want others to kill them or their loved ones, etc, etc.
The tongue, the sharp two edged sword that divides the spirit from the soul.
Illegalcombatant
Posts: 4,008
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/16/2015 8:33:55 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 2/16/2015 8:05:21 PM, ChristianPunk wrote:
I know atheism is merely a lack of belief in God, so that doesn't have a system or set of laws. But what has influenced your morals or what philosophy do you take up that has built your morals?

If God does not exist then what the nazi's or the child rapist did is not really wrong, it's just your own belief that is subject to change...........so the argument goes.

Once you make a link being well being and lack of well being being morally bad eg, child rape, that in principle has nothing to do with God.

The problem with religion is when it advocated something which is harmful and to get around this principle it can just use "Gods will" to justify anything and everything.
"Seems like another attempt to insert God into areas our knowledge has yet to penetrate. You figure God would be bigger than the gaps of our ignorance." Drafterman 19/5/12
Envisage
Posts: 3,646
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/16/2015 8:33:56 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 2/16/2015 8:28:17 PM, ChristianPunk wrote:
At 2/16/2015 8:24:38 PM, Envisage wrote:
At 2/16/2015 8:21:23 PM, ChristianPunk wrote:
At 2/16/2015 8:15:54 PM, Envisage wrote:
At 2/16/2015 8:05:21 PM, ChristianPunk wrote:
I know atheism is merely a lack of belief in God, so that doesn't have a system or set of laws. But what has influenced your morals or what philosophy do you take up that has built your morals?

I have embraced the abyss of nihilism. Feel welcome to join me.

Would you agree with Turgenev defining Nihilism as somebody who doesn't bow down to authority or take principles of faith?

No. Nihilism has a lot of sub-sections to it. For the purposes of this OP, I am a moral nihilist. Thus I assert that no moral statement is "true" at the very least.

If that be the case, are you open to allow certain said moral statements to carry into moral actions. Example. If no moral statement is true, then is there anything moral or immoral about a man who kills his wife and child because they gave him a headache? I'm not accusing you of anything, I just want to do a thought exercise.

That's right, there is nothing moral or immoral about a man killing his wife in that manner. I mean, how is it possible to coherently justify the statement:

"Unjustifiably killing people is wrong"

When you look at the language and logical structure of that proposition, non cognitivism entails. At least that's what I have deduced.

Statements like:

"I don't like the fact he murdered her"

Or

"Murdering people goes against my conscience"

Are all perfectly coherent cognitive statements, but neither say nothing about the nature of morality.
Envisage
Posts: 3,646
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/16/2015 8:36:16 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 2/16/2015 8:30:08 PM, Gentorev wrote:
At 2/16/2015 8:15:54 PM, Envisage wrote:
At 2/16/2015 8:05:21 PM, ChristianPunk wrote:
I know atheism is merely a lack of belief in God, so that doesn't have a system or set of laws. But what has influenced your morals or what philosophy do you take up that has built your morals?

I have embraced the abyss of nihilism. Feel welcome to join me.

Although i am not an atheist, I believe that the majority actually live by the law that is written in their hearts, and that is the law that they impose on the society around them. If they refuse to obey the very laws that they impose on others, then they condemn themselves.

Do they want their children to obey them or to spit in their face? Do they want their partner to jump into the cot with someone else? Do they want others to thieve from them? Do they want others to kill them or their loved ones, etc, etc.

That's social contract theory, or contractarianism, which is indeed a pragmatic way to life if you value your self-interest. However, the fact that there is a generalised descriptive way people behave, doesn't say anything prescriptive about the behsvior (I.e. The truth of moral statements).

That's the problem I have with morality.
Skepsikyma
Posts: 8,280
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/16/2015 8:36:56 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 2/16/2015 8:05:21 PM, ChristianPunk wrote:
I know atheism is merely a lack of belief in God, so that doesn't have a system or set of laws. But what has influenced your morals or what philosophy do you take up that has built your morals?

Whatever works. Bits and pieces of many different things.
"The Collectivist experiment is thoroughly suited (in appearance at least) to the Capitalist society which it proposes to replace. It works with the existing machinery of Capitalism, talks and thinks in the existing terms of Capitalism, appeals to just those appetites which Capitalism has aroused, and ridicules as fantastic and unheard-of just those things in society the memory of which Capitalism has killed among men wherever the blight of it has spread."
- Hilaire Belloc -
ChristianPunk
Posts: 1,710
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/16/2015 8:41:27 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 2/16/2015 8:33:56 PM, Envisage wrote:
At 2/16/2015 8:28:17 PM, ChristianPunk wrote:
At 2/16/2015 8:24:38 PM, Envisage wrote:
At 2/16/2015 8:21:23 PM, ChristianPunk wrote:
At 2/16/2015 8:15:54 PM, Envisage wrote:
At 2/16/2015 8:05:21 PM, ChristianPunk wrote:
I know atheism is merely a lack of belief in God, so that doesn't have a system or set of laws. But what has influenced your morals or what philosophy do you take up that has built your morals?

I have embraced the abyss of nihilism. Feel welcome to join me.

Would you agree with Turgenev defining Nihilism as somebody who doesn't bow down to authority or take principles of faith?

No. Nihilism has a lot of sub-sections to it. For the purposes of this OP, I am a moral nihilist. Thus I assert that no moral statement is "true" at the very least.

If that be the case, are you open to allow certain said moral statements to carry into moral actions. Example. If no moral statement is true, then is there anything moral or immoral about a man who kills his wife and child because they gave him a headache? I'm not accusing you of anything, I just want to do a thought exercise.

That's right, there is nothing moral or immoral about a man killing his wife in that manner. I mean, how is it possible to coherently justify the statement:

"Unjustifiably killing people is wrong"

When you look at the language and logical structure of that proposition, non cognitivism entails. At least that's what I have deduced.

Statements like:

"I don't like the fact he murdered her"

Or

"Murdering people goes against my conscience"

Are all perfectly coherent cognitive statements, but neither say nothing about the nature of morality.

Would you say that laws would need to be lifted on murder?
ChristianPunk
Posts: 1,710
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/16/2015 8:43:19 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 2/16/2015 8:33:55 PM, Illegalcombatant wrote:
At 2/16/2015 8:05:21 PM, ChristianPunk wrote:
I know atheism is merely a lack of belief in God, so that doesn't have a system or set of laws. But what has influenced your morals or what philosophy do you take up that has built your morals?

If God does not exist then what the nazi's or the child rapist did is not really wrong, it's just your own belief that is subject to change...........so the argument goes.

Once you make a link being well being and lack of well being being morally bad eg, child rape, that in principle has nothing to do with God.

The problem with religion is when it advocated something which is harmful and to get around this principle it can just use "Gods will" to justify anything and everything.

I agree that this is bad and that John 16 states there are people who will use God to do murderous acts. But my argument is not to convince you to be a Christian because it's moral. I'm asking where you get your morality from?
Envisage
Posts: 3,646
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/16/2015 8:44:33 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 2/16/2015 8:41:27 PM, ChristianPunk wrote:
At 2/16/2015 8:33:56 PM, Envisage wrote:
At 2/16/2015 8:28:17 PM, ChristianPunk wrote:
At 2/16/2015 8:24:38 PM, Envisage wrote:
At 2/16/2015 8:21:23 PM, ChristianPunk wrote:
At 2/16/2015 8:15:54 PM, Envisage wrote:
At 2/16/2015 8:05:21 PM, ChristianPunk wrote:
I know atheism is merely a lack of belief in God, so that doesn't have a system or set of laws. But what has influenced your morals or what philosophy do you take up that has built your morals?

I have embraced the abyss of nihilism. Feel welcome to join me.

Would you agree with Turgenev defining Nihilism as somebody who doesn't bow down to authority or take principles of faith?

No. Nihilism has a lot of sub-sections to it. For the purposes of this OP, I am a moral nihilist. Thus I assert that no moral statement is "true" at the very least.

If that be the case, are you open to allow certain said moral statements to carry into moral actions. Example. If no moral statement is true, then is there anything moral or immoral about a man who kills his wife and child because they gave him a headache? I'm not accusing you of anything, I just want to do a thought exercise.

That's right, there is nothing moral or immoral about a man killing his wife in that manner. I mean, how is it possible to coherently justify the statement:

"Unjustifiably killing people is wrong"

When you look at the language and logical structure of that proposition, non cognitivism entails. At least that's what I have deduced.

Statements like:

"I don't like the fact he murdered her"

Or

"Murdering people goes against my conscience"

Are all perfectly coherent cognitive statements, but neither say nothing about the nature of morality.

Would you say that laws would need to be lifted on murder?

No. Laws =/= morality. I just spoke about contractarianism (social contract theory) further up, there are many other pragmatic moral philosophies, which can be adapted to a nihilist framework. Thus, it boils down to self-interest and the role of government with respect to our self-interest. Laws etc are a secondary effect of that, of which murder will remain.
Illegalcombatant
Posts: 4,008
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/16/2015 8:46:21 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 2/16/2015 8:43:19 PM, ChristianPunk wrote:
At 2/16/2015 8:33:55 PM, Illegalcombatant wrote:
At 2/16/2015 8:05:21 PM, ChristianPunk wrote:
I know atheism is merely a lack of belief in God, so that doesn't have a system or set of laws. But what has influenced your morals or what philosophy do you take up that has built your morals?

If God does not exist then what the nazi's or the child rapist did is not really wrong, it's just your own belief that is subject to change...........so the argument goes.

Once you make a link being well being and lack of well being being morally bad eg, child rape, that in principle has nothing to do with God.

The problem with religion is when it advocated something which is harmful and to get around this principle it can just use "Gods will" to justify anything and everything.

I agree that this is bad and that John 16 states there are people who will use God to do murderous acts. But my argument is not to convince you to be a Christian because it's moral. I'm asking where you get your morality from?

Well clearly "God" zaps "morality" into humans..................

I think it's probably us. Have you ever seen the George Carlin sanctity of life routine ?
"Seems like another attempt to insert God into areas our knowledge has yet to penetrate. You figure God would be bigger than the gaps of our ignorance." Drafterman 19/5/12
ChristianPunk
Posts: 1,710
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/16/2015 8:49:02 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 2/16/2015 8:44:33 PM, Envisage wrote:
At 2/16/2015 8:41:27 PM, ChristianPunk wrote:
At 2/16/2015 8:33:56 PM, Envisage wrote:
At 2/16/2015 8:28:17 PM, ChristianPunk wrote:
At 2/16/2015 8:24:38 PM, Envisage wrote:
At 2/16/2015 8:21:23 PM, ChristianPunk wrote:
At 2/16/2015 8:15:54 PM, Envisage wrote:
At 2/16/2015 8:05:21 PM, ChristianPunk wrote:
I know atheism is merely a lack of belief in God, so that doesn't have a system or set of laws. But what has influenced your morals or what philosophy do you take up that has built your morals?

I have embraced the abyss of nihilism. Feel welcome to join me.

Would you agree with Turgenev defining Nihilism as somebody who doesn't bow down to authority or take principles of faith?

No. Nihilism has a lot of sub-sections to it. For the purposes of this OP, I am a moral nihilist. Thus I assert that no moral statement is "true" at the very least.

If that be the case, are you open to allow certain said moral statements to carry into moral actions. Example. If no moral statement is true, then is there anything moral or immoral about a man who kills his wife and child because they gave him a headache? I'm not accusing you of anything, I just want to do a thought exercise.

That's right, there is nothing moral or immoral about a man killing his wife in that manner. I mean, how is it possible to coherently justify the statement:

"Unjustifiably killing people is wrong"

When you look at the language and logical structure of that proposition, non cognitivism entails. At least that's what I have deduced.

Statements like:

"I don't like the fact he murdered her"

Or

"Murdering people goes against my conscience"

Are all perfectly coherent cognitive statements, but neither say nothing about the nature of morality.

Would you say that laws would need to be lifted on murder?

No. Laws =/= morality. I just spoke about contractarianism (social contract theory) further up, there are many other pragmatic moral philosophies, which can be adapted to a nihilist framework. Thus, it boils down to self-interest and the role of government with respect to our self-interest. Laws etc are a secondary effect of that, of which murder will remain.

But what's the purpose of the law? Why should the man be arrested or executed?
ChristianPunk
Posts: 1,710
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/16/2015 8:49:54 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 2/16/2015 8:46:21 PM, Illegalcombatant wrote:
At 2/16/2015 8:43:19 PM, ChristianPunk wrote:
At 2/16/2015 8:33:55 PM, Illegalcombatant wrote:
At 2/16/2015 8:05:21 PM, ChristianPunk wrote:
I know atheism is merely a lack of belief in God, so that doesn't have a system or set of laws. But what has influenced your morals or what philosophy do you take up that has built your morals?

If God does not exist then what the nazi's or the child rapist did is not really wrong, it's just your own belief that is subject to change...........so the argument goes.

Once you make a link being well being and lack of well being being morally bad eg, child rape, that in principle has nothing to do with God.

The problem with religion is when it advocated something which is harmful and to get around this principle it can just use "Gods will" to justify anything and everything.

I agree that this is bad and that John 16 states there are people who will use God to do murderous acts. But my argument is not to convince you to be a Christian because it's moral. I'm asking where you get your morality from?

Well clearly "God" zaps "morality" into humans..................

I think it's probably us. Have you ever seen the George Carlin sanctity of life routine ?

No. I'm trying to get a serious answer from you, unless you consider George Carlin's routine to be an enlightenment?
Envisage
Posts: 3,646
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/16/2015 8:58:39 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 2/16/2015 8:49:02 PM, ChristianPunk wrote:
At 2/16/2015 8:44:33 PM, Envisage wrote:
At 2/16/2015 8:41:27 PM, ChristianPunk wrote:
At 2/16/2015 8:33:56 PM, Envisage wrote:
At 2/16/2015 8:28:17 PM, ChristianPunk wrote:
At 2/16/2015 8:24:38 PM, Envisage wrote:
At 2/16/2015 8:21:23 PM, ChristianPunk wrote:
At 2/16/2015 8:15:54 PM, Envisage wrote:
At 2/16/2015 8:05:21 PM, ChristianPunk wrote:
I know atheism is merely a lack of belief in God, so that doesn't have a system or set of laws. But what has influenced your morals or what philosophy do you take up that has built your morals?

I have embraced the abyss of nihilism. Feel welcome to join me.

Would you agree with Turgenev defining Nihilism as somebody who doesn't bow down to authority or take principles of faith?

No. Nihilism has a lot of sub-sections to it. For the purposes of this OP, I am a moral nihilist. Thus I assert that no moral statement is "true" at the very least.

If that be the case, are you open to allow certain said moral statements to carry into moral actions. Example. If no moral statement is true, then is there anything moral or immoral about a man who kills his wife and child because they gave him a headache? I'm not accusing you of anything, I just want to do a thought exercise.

That's right, there is nothing moral or immoral about a man killing his wife in that manner. I mean, how is it possible to coherently justify the statement:

"Unjustifiably killing people is wrong"

When you look at the language and logical structure of that proposition, non cognitivism entails. At least that's what I have deduced.

Statements like:

"I don't like the fact he murdered her"

Or

"Murdering people goes against my conscience"

Are all perfectly coherent cognitive statements, but neither say nothing about the nature of morality.

Would you say that laws would need to be lifted on murder?

No. Laws =/= morality. I just spoke about contractarianism (social contract theory) further up, there are many other pragmatic moral philosophies, which can be adapted to a nihilist framework. Thus, it boils down to self-interest and the role of government with respect to our self-interest. Laws etc are a secondary effect of that, of which murder will remain.

But what's the purpose of the law? Why should the man be arrested or executed?

It preserves the self-interst of those who run society. Thus if you value your self-interest (which you do, via. Tautology) then you will agree with the social contract (to imprison the man or w.e.). It says nothing about the moral nature of the action, but only as a mechanical "if and then" function.

Of course this assumes contractarianism is centred around your self-interest, which is not necessarily the case....
Illegalcombatant
Posts: 4,008
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/16/2015 8:59:02 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 2/16/2015 8:49:54 PM, ChristianPunk wrote:
At 2/16/2015 8:46:21 PM, Illegalcombatant wrote:
At 2/16/2015 8:43:19 PM, ChristianPunk wrote:
At 2/16/2015 8:33:55 PM, Illegalcombatant wrote:
At 2/16/2015 8:05:21 PM, ChristianPunk wrote:
I know atheism is merely a lack of belief in God, so that doesn't have a system or set of laws. But what has influenced your morals or what philosophy do you take up that has built your morals?

If God does not exist then what the nazi's or the child rapist did is not really wrong, it's just your own belief that is subject to change...........so the argument goes.

Once you make a link being well being and lack of well being being morally bad eg, child rape, that in principle has nothing to do with God.

The problem with religion is when it advocated something which is harmful and to get around this principle it can just use "Gods will" to justify anything and everything.

I agree that this is bad and that John 16 states there are people who will use God to do murderous acts. But my argument is not to convince you to be a Christian because it's moral. I'm asking where you get your morality from?

Well clearly "God" zaps "morality" into humans..................

I think it's probably us. Have you ever seen the George Carlin sanctity of life routine ?

No. I'm trying to get a serious answer from you, unless you consider George Carlin's routine to be an enlightenment?

Yes I do. I think it is worth considering. Since he is talking about a morality that most of us subscribe to, eg don't kill our own children and eat them but it's great to kill and eat chickens and how exactly that morality came about. HINT: It didn't come from the chicken.

In short from us out of self interest is his conclusion.
"Seems like another attempt to insert God into areas our knowledge has yet to penetrate. You figure God would be bigger than the gaps of our ignorance." Drafterman 19/5/12
Double_R
Posts: 4,886
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/16/2015 9:02:14 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 2/16/2015 8:05:21 PM, ChristianPunk wrote:
I know atheism is merely a lack of belief in God, so that doesn't have a system or set of laws. But what has influenced your morals or what philosophy do you take up that has built your morals?

From an understanding of reality combined with empathy. Same as everyone else.

I think a better question is, as a Christian, where do you get your morals from? I am guessing you will say from God, or from the bible. And if so, how did you determine that God is good?
ChristianPunk
Posts: 1,710
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/16/2015 9:36:21 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 2/16/2015 8:58:39 PM, Envisage wrote:
At 2/16/2015 8:49:02 PM, ChristianPunk wrote:
At 2/16/2015 8:44:33 PM, Envisage wrote:
At 2/16/2015 8:41:27 PM, ChristianPunk wrote:
At 2/16/2015 8:33:56 PM, Envisage wrote:
At 2/16/2015 8:28:17 PM, ChristianPunk wrote:
At 2/16/2015 8:24:38 PM, Envisage wrote:
At 2/16/2015 8:21:23 PM, ChristianPunk wrote:
At 2/16/2015 8:15:54 PM, Envisage wrote:
At 2/16/2015 8:05:21 PM, ChristianPunk wrote:
I know atheism is merely a lack of belief in God, so that doesn't have a system or set of laws. But what has influenced your morals or what philosophy do you take up that has built your morals?

I have embraced the abyss of nihilism. Feel welcome to join me.

Would you agree with Turgenev defining Nihilism as somebody who doesn't bow down to authority or take principles of faith?

No. Nihilism has a lot of sub-sections to it. For the purposes of this OP, I am a moral nihilist. Thus I assert that no moral statement is "true" at the very least.

If that be the case, are you open to allow certain said moral statements to carry into moral actions. Example. If no moral statement is true, then is there anything moral or immoral about a man who kills his wife and child because they gave him a headache? I'm not accusing you of anything, I just want to do a thought exercise.

That's right, there is nothing moral or immoral about a man killing his wife in that manner. I mean, how is it possible to coherently justify the statement:

"Unjustifiably killing people is wrong"

When you look at the language and logical structure of that proposition, non cognitivism entails. At least that's what I have deduced.

Statements like:

"I don't like the fact he murdered her"

Or

"Murdering people goes against my conscience"

Are all perfectly coherent cognitive statements, but neither say nothing about the nature of morality.

Would you say that laws would need to be lifted on murder?

No. Laws =/= morality. I just spoke about contractarianism (social contract theory) further up, there are many other pragmatic moral philosophies, which can be adapted to a nihilist framework. Thus, it boils down to self-interest and the role of government with respect to our self-interest. Laws etc are a secondary effect of that, of which murder will remain.

But what's the purpose of the law? Why should the man be arrested or executed?

It preserves the self-interst of those who run society. Thus if you value your self-interest (which you do, via. Tautology) then you will agree with the social contract (to imprison the man or w.e.). It says nothing about the moral nature of the action, but only as a mechanical "if and then" function.

Of course this assumes contractarianism is centred around your self-interest, which is not necessarily the case....

What if in one society, the people who run it have self interest to protect the people who will kill for reasons people define as cruel or immoral?
ChristianPunk
Posts: 1,710
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/16/2015 9:40:10 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 2/16/2015 9:02:14 PM, Double_R wrote:
At 2/16/2015 8:05:21 PM, ChristianPunk wrote:
I know atheism is merely a lack of belief in God, so that doesn't have a system or set of laws. But what has influenced your morals or what philosophy do you take up that has built your morals?

From an understanding of reality combined with empathy. Same as everyone else.

I think a better question is, as a Christian, where do you get your morals from? I am guessing you will say from God, or from the bible. And if so, how did you determine that God is good?

A starting point basis for my morals comes from the Bible in the ten commandments. I determine God is good because of the idea of treating humans with forgiveness and the golden rule. Even if he did things we consider horrible, I feel that if he does feel bad for it, he would want to be forgiven. And so I do the same due to the experience I have had in the past where I thought if you didn't forgive me or anybody else for doing something bad, you deserved to be dead. I didn't forgive anybody and every time I made a mistake, I would cut myself, bash my head to the walls or my fists, jab myself with a pencil, etc.
popculturepooka
Posts: 7,924
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/16/2015 9:42:30 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 2/16/2015 8:33:55 PM, Illegalcombatant wrote:
At 2/16/2015 8:05:21 PM, ChristianPunk wrote:
I know atheism is merely a lack of belief in God, so that doesn't have a system or set of laws. But what has influenced your morals or what philosophy do you take up that has built your morals?

If God does not exist then what the nazi's or the child rapist did is not really wrong, it's just your own belief that is subject to change...........so the argument goes.

Once you make a link being well being and lack of well being being morally bad eg, child rape, that in principle has nothing to do with God.

The problem with religion is when it advocated something which is harmful and to get around this principle it can just use "Gods will" to justify anything and everything.

Aren't you a utilitarianist? lol Utilitarian theories are infamous for their weakness to reductio absurdum "anything goes" arguments.
At 10/3/2016 11:49:13 PM, thett3 wrote:
BLACK LIVES MATTER!
Gentorev
Posts: 2,877
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/16/2015 10:58:37 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 2/16/2015 8:36:16 PM, Envisage wrote:
At 2/16/2015 8:30:08 PM, Gentorev wrote:
At 2/16/2015 8:15:54 PM, Envisage wrote:
At 2/16/2015 8:05:21 PM, ChristianPunk wrote:
I know atheism is merely a lack of belief in God, so that doesn't have a system or set of laws. But what has influenced your morals or what philosophy do you take up that has built your morals?

I have embraced the abyss of nihilism. Feel welcome to join me.

Although i am not an atheist, I believe that the majority actually live by the law that is written in their hearts, and that is the law that they impose on the society around them. If they refuse to obey the very laws that they impose on others, then they condemn themselves.

Do they want their children to obey them or to spit in their face? Do they want their partner to jump into the cot with someone else? Do they want others to thieve from them? Do they want others to kill them or their loved ones, etc, etc.

That's social contract theory, or contractarianism, which is indeed a pragmatic way to life if you value your self-interest. However, the fact that there is a generalised descriptive way people behave, doesn't say anything prescriptive about the behsvior (I.e. The truth of moral statements).

That's the problem I have with morality.

They reveal their morality or immorality in that they obey or disobey the laws that they impose on everyone else.

An ancient Eskimo who offered his wife to another hunter he met out on the ice, would have been a moral man, as he would expect nothing less from his fellow man.

Do unto others as you would have them do unto you, this is the law that the greater majority of people of every persuasion, try to live by.

Although there are those who live by the law which states, "Do unto others as they would do to you, only do it first." And the pre-emptive strike can sometimes be a good thing, if you have sound evidence of what your enemy is preparing for you.
The tongue, the sharp two edged sword that divides the spirit from the soul.
Illegalcombatant
Posts: 4,008
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/17/2015 12:05:58 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 2/16/2015 9:42:30 PM, popculturepooka wrote:
At 2/16/2015 8:33:55 PM, Illegalcombatant wrote:
At 2/16/2015 8:05:21 PM, ChristianPunk wrote:
I know atheism is merely a lack of belief in God, so that doesn't have a system or set of laws. But what has influenced your morals or what philosophy do you take up that has built your morals?

If God does not exist then what the nazi's or the child rapist did is not really wrong, it's just your own belief that is subject to change...........so the argument goes.

Once you make a link being well being and lack of well being being morally bad eg, child rape, that in principle has nothing to do with God.

The problem with religion is when it advocated something which is harmful and to get around this principle it can just use "Gods will" to justify anything and everything.

Aren't you a utilitarianist? lol Utilitarian theories are infamous for their weakness to reductio absurdum "anything goes" arguments.

You mean like if rapeing one baby would end world hunger then under utilitarian principles it would be the right thing to do ? fair enough to follow the logic pop.

But it works both ways, if God orders some one to rape a child then it is good for them to rape that child. Now chances are people reading this their religious apologetics just kicked in........."but God wouldn't command such a thing"

Well that is your just cutting off the counter argument at it's knees by arbitrarily claiming what God can't command. But if you don't do that but follow the actual logic of it..............

What about following virtue ? like honesty ? well what do you do when the nazi's come knocking at your door and you have some jews hiding in the attic and they ask you, hey see any of them jews ?

Do you think you have a moral system that is beyond reducto ? cause I'd love to hear it if you do.
"Seems like another attempt to insert God into areas our knowledge has yet to penetrate. You figure God would be bigger than the gaps of our ignorance." Drafterman 19/5/12
Skepsikyma
Posts: 8,280
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/17/2015 12:26:48 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 2/17/2015 12:05:58 AM, Illegalcombatant wrote:
At 2/16/2015 9:42:30 PM, popculturepooka wrote:
At 2/16/2015 8:33:55 PM, Illegalcombatant wrote:
At 2/16/2015 8:05:21 PM, ChristianPunk wrote:
I know atheism is merely a lack of belief in God, so that doesn't have a system or set of laws. But what has influenced your morals or what philosophy do you take up that has built your morals?

If God does not exist then what the nazi's or the child rapist did is not really wrong, it's just your own belief that is subject to change...........so the argument goes.

Once you make a link being well being and lack of well being being morally bad eg, child rape, that in principle has nothing to do with God.

The problem with religion is when it advocated something which is harmful and to get around this principle it can just use "Gods will" to justify anything and everything.

Aren't you a utilitarianist? lol Utilitarian theories are infamous for their weakness to reductio absurdum "anything goes" arguments.

You mean like if rapeing one baby would end world hunger then under utilitarian principles it would be the right thing to do ? fair enough to follow the logic pop.

But it works both ways, if God orders some one to rape a child then it is good for them to rape that child. Now chances are people reading this their religious apologetics just kicked in........."but God wouldn't command such a thing"

Well that is your just cutting off the counter argument at it's knees by arbitrarily claiming what God can't command. But if you don't do that but follow the actual logic of it..............

What about following virtue ? like honesty ? well what do you do when the nazi's come knocking at your door and you have some jews hiding in the attic and they ask you, hey see any of them jews ?

Do you think you have a moral system that is beyond reducto ? cause I'd love to hear it if you do.

Your argument only applies to Divine Command Theory. The other horn of Euthyphro's Dilemma isn't touched by it. Some theists believe that what is good is good because god finds it good, others hold that god finds the good to be good because it is good. Leibniz, for example, was of the latter school:

"In saying, therefore, that things are not good according to any standard of goodness, but simply by the will of God, it seems to me that one destroys, without realizing it, all the love of God and all his glory; for why praise him for what he has done, if he would be equally praiseworthy in doing the contrary? Where will be his justice and his wisdom if he has only a certain despotic power, if arbitrary will takes the place of reasonableness, and if in accord with the definition of tyrants, justice consists in that which is pleasing to the most powerful? Besides it seems that every act of willing supposes some reason for the willing and this reason, of course, must precede the act. This is why, accordingly, I find so strange those expressions of certain philosophers who say that the eternal truths of metaphysics and Geometry, and consequently the principles of goodness, of justice, and of perfection, are effects only of the will of God. To me it seems that all these follow from his understanding, which does not depend upon his will any more than does his essence."
- Discourse on Metaphysics -
"The Collectivist experiment is thoroughly suited (in appearance at least) to the Capitalist society which it proposes to replace. It works with the existing machinery of Capitalism, talks and thinks in the existing terms of Capitalism, appeals to just those appetites which Capitalism has aroused, and ridicules as fantastic and unheard-of just those things in society the memory of which Capitalism has killed among men wherever the blight of it has spread."
- Hilaire Belloc -
Envisage
Posts: 3,646
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/17/2015 5:50:18 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 2/16/2015 9:36:21 PM, ChristianPunk wrote:
At 2/16/2015 8:58:39 PM, Envisage wrote:
At 2/16/2015 8:49:02 PM, ChristianPunk wrote:
At 2/16/2015 8:44:33 PM, Envisage wrote:
At 2/16/2015 8:41:27 PM, ChristianPunk wrote:
At 2/16/2015 8:33:56 PM, Envisage wrote:
At 2/16/2015 8:28:17 PM, ChristianPunk wrote:
At 2/16/2015 8:24:38 PM, Envisage wrote:
At 2/16/2015 8:21:23 PM, ChristianPunk wrote:
At 2/16/2015 8:15:54 PM, Envisage wrote:
At 2/16/2015 8:05:21 PM, ChristianPunk wrote:
I know atheism is merely a lack of belief in God, so that doesn't have a system or set of laws. But what has influenced your morals or what philosophy do you take up that has built your morals?

I have embraced the abyss of nihilism. Feel welcome to join me.

Would you agree with Turgenev defining Nihilism as somebody who doesn't bow down to authority or take principles of faith?

No. Nihilism has a lot of sub-sections to it. For the purposes of this OP, I am a moral nihilist. Thus I assert that no moral statement is "true" at the very least.

If that be the case, are you open to allow certain said moral statements to carry into moral actions. Example. If no moral statement is true, then is there anything moral or immoral about a man who kills his wife and child because they gave him a headache? I'm not accusing you of anything, I just want to do a thought exercise.

That's right, there is nothing moral or immoral about a man killing his wife in that manner. I mean, how is it possible to coherently justify the statement:

"Unjustifiably killing people is wrong"

When you look at the language and logical structure of that proposition, non cognitivism entails. At least that's what I have deduced.

Statements like:

"I don't like the fact he murdered her"

Or

"Murdering people goes against my conscience"

Are all perfectly coherent cognitive statements, but neither say nothing about the nature of morality.

Would you say that laws would need to be lifted on murder?

No. Laws =/= morality. I just spoke about contractarianism (social contract theory) further up, there are many other pragmatic moral philosophies, which can be adapted to a nihilist framework. Thus, it boils down to self-interest and the role of government with respect to our self-interest. Laws etc are a secondary effect of that, of which murder will remain.

But what's the purpose of the law? Why should the man be arrested or executed?

It preserves the self-interst of those who run society. Thus if you value your self-interest (which you do, via. Tautology) then you will agree with the social contract (to imprison the man or w.e.). It says nothing about the moral nature of the action, but only as a mechanical "if and then" function.

Of course this assumes contractarianism is centred around your self-interest, which is not necessarily the case....

What if in one society, the people who run it have self interest to protect the people who will kill for reasons people define as cruel or immoral?

You have two options:

1. To remain in society X
2. To leave society X

If on balance, society X fulfils your self-interests, then you would be better off within that society than without one at all. Society X has a social contract, i.e. not to kill, not to abort babies, etc. *not all of these contracts are going to be within your immediate self-interest*. For example, someone who has strong sexual urges may really want to rape someone, however the cost of doing that is imprisonment, social stigma, weight on conscience, etc. Thus pseudo-moral behaviour arises from you accepting the social contract.

Thus, nothing is "moral" per se, but you have a society that conforms to certain standards which are emergent from the values of the people it's built around. I am generally assuming a democratic system (or something of the like) here rather than totalitarian. Although even a totalitarian system has the same considerations. It may or may not be within your self-interest to remain in a totalitarian system and abide by their rules.
JJ50
Posts: 2,144
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/17/2015 6:11:31 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
Morality or lack of it is part of human nature, nothing to do with any deity. The Biblical deity could learn a thing or two from decent humans as it is completely lacking in morality.
RuvDraba
Posts: 6,033
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/17/2015 6:47:17 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 2/16/2015 8:05:21 PM, ChristianPunk wrote:
I know atheism is merely a lack of belief in God, so that doesn't have a system or set of laws. But what has influenced your morals or what philosophy do you take up that has built your morals?

I think most atheists support many ideas current in the Enlightenment, but not before, and find that's true in my case, at least.

Ideas like the essential social and moral equality of man; the collective right of humanity to seek to escape anguish and suffering; our obligation to help one another do that if we can; our individual rights to pursue happiness and purpose; and therefore our attendant rights to truthful and compassionate government, to privacy and freedom of thought, freedom of worship or nonworship, freedom of travel and association.

These principles are humanistic -- meaning, they're created by studying mankind as mankind; not mankind as a part of a particular religious mythology. They don't preclude contribution by people of faith, but they don't require a particular religious dogma to support them either. As with the humanists of the Enlightenment, most atheists I know think that human equality and our right to pursue happiness are self-evident.

If you were to ask what makes it self-evident, I'd say it's our ability to understand one another's minds and feelings -- our empathy and sympathy for one another, and our instincts even before we have language to comfort one another when distressed. Our capacity for kindness transcends culture or faith, and is fundamental to our species identity.

I hope that may be useful, CP.
ChristianPunk
Posts: 1,710
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/17/2015 7:52:58 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 2/17/2015 6:11:31 AM, JJ50 wrote:
Morality or lack of it is part of human nature, nothing to do with any deity. The Biblical deity could learn a thing or two from decent humans as it is completely lacking in morality.

So humans have their morals in human nature, but I'm guessing it's different for other animals?