About Belief, Religion and God

Off Topic Politics & World Issues
821

[quote]BackInAction wrote:

[quote]honest_lifter wrote:

[quote]BackInAction wrote:

To summarize my whole point of this question: I’m trying to demonstrate that morality doesn’t necessitate religion. You could be just as moral without it.
[/quote]

Yes, you could be just as moral without religion.[/quote]

But I’m trying to figure out why you said you wouldn’t be without it.[/quote]

You are discussing the destruction of one’s guiding principals. With out the muse, what’s the point? Doing the right thing is often difficult. So why do something hard when it absolutely has no merit. Nobody here is altruistic, I don’t think that people are capable of it.

822

[quote]honest_lifter wrote:

[quote]BackInAction wrote:

[quote]honest_lifter wrote:

[quote]BackInAction wrote:

[quote]honest_lifter wrote:

[quote]BackInAction wrote:

[quote]honest_lifter wrote:
You need to be careful about jumping to conclusions or making assertions based on little evidence.

Your reasoning lacks substance. [/quote]

Please explain.[/quote]

I never said it was outside of the context of religion, and I didn’t say it develops within someone.

Both conclusions you drew, because I mentioned conscience.[/quote]

I was confused because your quote:

“They are the very ones who demonstrate the matter of the law to be written in their hearts, while their conscience is bearing witness with them and, between their own thoughts, they are being accused or even excused.”

Is this not the development of morality from an individuals perspective? I’m confused on what we disagree with.

Anyways, back to my original question: What is stopping your from murdering others if there is no God? It is conscience which can exist without religion, right?

To summarize my whole point of this question: I’m trying to demonstrate that morality doesn’t necessitate religion. You could be just as moral without it.
[/quote]

Conscience was put there by God. I mean, what animal demonstrates the kind of morality that humans have?[/quote]

Lots of animals. Here’s some examples:

  1. A teenage female elephant nursing an injured leg is knocked over by a rambunctious hormone-laden teenage male. An older female sees this happen, chases the male away, and goes back to the younger female and touches her sore leg with her trunk.
  2. A rat in a cage refuses to push a lever for food when it sees that another rat receives an electric shock as a result.
  3. A male Diana monkey who learned to insert a token into a slot to obtain food helps a female who can’t get the hang of the trick, inserting the token for her and allowing her to eat the food reward.Ã?¢?Ã?¦

Source: http://pressblog.uchicago.edu/2009/01/27/do_animals_have_a_sense_of_mor.html

[/quote]

Now as moral as humans. Btw, we are using the term “moral” as a given. What defines moral? [/quote]

Moral: “Pertaining to, or concerned with the principles or rules of right conduct or the distinction between right and wrong”.

What do humans do that’s more moral than those examples?

823

[quote]pat wrote:

[quote]BackInAction wrote:

[quote]honest_lifter wrote:

[quote]BackInAction wrote:

To summarize my whole point of this question: I’m trying to demonstrate that morality doesn’t necessitate religion. You could be just as moral without it.
[/quote]

Yes, you could be just as moral without religion.[/quote]

But I’m trying to figure out why you said you wouldn’t be without it.[/quote]

You are discussing the destruction of one’s guiding principals. With out the muse, what’s the point? Doing the right thing is often difficult. So why do something hard when it absolutely has no merit. Nobody here is altruistic, I don’t think that people are capable of it. [/quote]

Interesting.

824

[quote]honest_lifter wrote:

[quote]BackInAction wrote:

[quote]honest_lifter wrote:

[quote]BackInAction wrote:

To summarize my whole point of this question: I’m trying to demonstrate that morality doesn’t necessitate religion. You could be just as moral without it.
[/quote]

Yes, you could be just as moral without religion.[/quote]

But I’m trying to figure out why you said you wouldn’t be without it.[/quote]

Why should I be as moral?[/quote]

For the betterment of those around you.

825

[quote]BackInAction wrote:

[quote]honest_lifter wrote:

[quote]BackInAction wrote:

[quote]honest_lifter wrote:

[quote]BackInAction wrote:

[quote]honest_lifter wrote:

[quote]BackInAction wrote:

[quote]honest_lifter wrote:
You need to be careful about jumping to conclusions or making assertions based on little evidence.

Your reasoning lacks substance. [/quote]

Please explain.[/quote]

I never said it was outside of the context of religion, and I didn’t say it develops within someone.

Both conclusions you drew, because I mentioned conscience.[/quote]

I was confused because your quote:

“They are the very ones who demonstrate the matter of the law to be written in their hearts, while their conscience is bearing witness with them and, between their own thoughts, they are being accused or even excused.”

Is this not the development of morality from an individuals perspective? I’m confused on what we disagree with.

Anyways, back to my original question: What is stopping your from murdering others if there is no God? It is conscience which can exist without religion, right?

To summarize my whole point of this question: I’m trying to demonstrate that morality doesn’t necessitate religion. You could be just as moral without it.
[/quote]

Conscience was put there by God. I mean, what animal demonstrates the kind of morality that humans have?[/quote]

Lots of animals. Here’s some examples:

  1. A teenage female elephant nursing an injured leg is knocked over by a rambunctious hormone-laden teenage male. An older female sees this happen, chases the male away, and goes back to the younger female and touches her sore leg with her trunk.
  2. A rat in a cage refuses to push a lever for food when it sees that another rat receives an electric shock as a result.
  3. A male Diana monkey who learned to insert a token into a slot to obtain food helps a female who can’t get the hang of the trick, inserting the token for her and allowing her to eat the food reward.Ã??Ã?¢?Ã??Ã?¦

Source: http://pressblog.uchicago.edu/2009/01/27/do_animals_have_a_sense_of_mor.html

[/quote]

Now as moral as humans. Btw, we are using the term “moral” as a given. What defines moral? [/quote]

Moral: “Pertaining to, or concerned with the principles or rules of right conduct or the distinction between right and wrong”.

What do humans do that’s more moral than those examples?
[/quote]

What is right conduct?

826

[quote]BackInAction wrote:

[quote]honest_lifter wrote:

[quote]BackInAction wrote:

[quote]honest_lifter wrote:

[quote]BackInAction wrote:

To summarize my whole point of this question: I’m trying to demonstrate that morality doesn’t necessitate religion. You could be just as moral without it.
[/quote]

Yes, you could be just as moral without religion.[/quote]

But I’m trying to figure out why you said you wouldn’t be without it.[/quote]

Why should I be as moral?[/quote]

For the betterment of those around you.
[/quote]

Why? What purpose?

827

[quote]honest_lifter wrote:

[quote]BackInAction wrote:

[quote]honest_lifter wrote:

[quote]BackInAction wrote:

[quote]honest_lifter wrote:

[quote]BackInAction wrote:

To summarize my whole point of this question: I’m trying to demonstrate that morality doesn’t necessitate religion. You could be just as moral without it.
[/quote]

Yes, you could be just as moral without religion.[/quote]

But I’m trying to figure out why you said you wouldn’t be without it.[/quote]

Why should I be as moral?[/quote]

For the betterment of those around you.
[/quote]

Why? What purpose?[/quote]

More specifically, for the betterment of your group. If everyone conducted themselves in self-serving ways, the group would suffer. IMO, moral actions are determined by the individual based on feedback on what is acceptable to others around you. Actions that are acceptable are those that are beneficial to the group (compassion, honesty, self-sacrifice). Actions that are not acceptable are not beneficial to the group (stealing, violence, dishonesty).

828

[quote]honest_lifter wrote:

[quote]ephrem wrote:
Life-like evolution in a test tube

http://www.cosmosmagazine.com/news/3325/life-evolution-a-test-tube
[/quote]

Thank you for sharing. I read the article and have my own questions and concerns, but first off, what do you feel they have accomplished and what this means.

pat: What is your resultant assertion from posting this, or is thir merely informational?

[/quote]

…it shows us that life can form out of the basic building blocks. It doesn’t answer the question where life comes from, or how it is able to come to fruition, but perhaps… perhaps we can move past the …shortsighted idea of a 6 day creation…

829

[quote]pat wrote:

[quote]honest_lifter wrote:

[quote]ephrem wrote:
Religion now appears so early in civilized life, if Schmidt is correct, that some think it may be less a product of culture than a cause of it, less a revelation than a genetic inheritance. The archeologist Jacques Cauvin once posited that “the beginning of the gods was the beginning of agriculture,” and GÃ???Ã??Ã?¶bekli may prove his case.

http://www.newsweek.com/id/233844/page/1[/quote]

Thank you. I just read this. So is this in support of God or Evolution?[/quote]

Or both?[/quote]

…it is a testament to how religion can drive people to do great things. From the evidence at the site it’s clear that this wasn’t a monotheistic religion, but it also illustrates that what makes us human is this longing to be part of something greater than just being human…

830

[quote]pat wrote:

[quote]BackInAction wrote:

[quote]honest_lifter wrote:

[quote]BackInAction wrote:

To summarize my whole point of this question: I’m trying to demonstrate that morality doesn’t necessitate religion. You could be just as moral without it.
[/quote]

Yes, you could be just as moral without religion.[/quote]

But I’m trying to figure out why you said you wouldn’t be without it.[/quote]

You are discussing the destruction of one’s guiding principals. With out the muse, what’s the point? Doing the right thing is often difficult. So why do something hard when it absolutely has no merit. Nobody here is altruistic, I don’t think that people are capable of it. [/quote]

…there’s a video floating around on the net of an argentinian guy who pushes a van that stalled off the tracks and is nearly struck by the oncoming train. What was his motive? The point is doing good for goodness sake. Besides, doing good isn’t hard at all…

831

[quote]BackInAction wrote:

More specifically, for the betterment of your group. If everyone conducted themselves in self-serving ways, the group would suffer. IMO, moral actions are determined by the individual based on feedback on what is acceptable to others around you. Actions that are acceptable are those that are beneficial to the group (compassion, honesty, self-sacrifice). Actions that are not acceptable are not beneficial to the group (stealing, violence, dishonesty).

[/quote]

…i’ve discussed this on a number of threads, and with Pat, but it doesn’t sink in. In order to accept what you said here you’d have to accept evolution, and disregard the creation myth…

832

[quote]BackInAction wrote:

[quote]honest_lifter wrote:

[quote]BackInAction wrote:

[quote]honest_lifter wrote:

[quote]BackInAction wrote:

[quote]honest_lifter wrote:

[quote]BackInAction wrote:

To summarize my whole point of this question: I’m trying to demonstrate that morality doesn’t necessitate religion. You could be just as moral without it.
[/quote]

Yes, you could be just as moral without religion.[/quote]

But I’m trying to figure out why you said you wouldn’t be without it.[/quote]

Why should I be as moral?[/quote]

For the betterment of those around you.
[/quote]

Why? What purpose?[/quote]

More specifically, for the betterment of your group. If everyone conducted themselves in self-serving ways, the group would suffer. IMO, moral actions are determined by the individual based on feedback on what is acceptable to others around you. Actions that are acceptable are those that are beneficial to the group (compassion, honesty, self-sacrifice). Actions that are not acceptable are not beneficial to the group (stealing, violence, dishonesty).

[/quote]

Why have humans gravitated toward the latter or non beneficial things?

833

[quote]ephrem wrote:

[quote]BackInAction wrote:

More specifically, for the betterment of your group. If everyone conducted themselves in self-serving ways, the group would suffer. IMO, moral actions are determined by the individual based on feedback on what is acceptable to others around you. Actions that are acceptable are those that are beneficial to the group (compassion, honesty, self-sacrifice). Actions that are not acceptable are not beneficial to the group (stealing, violence, dishonesty).

[/quote]

…i’ve discussed this on a number of threads, and with Pat, but it doesn’t sink in. In order to accept what you said here you’d have to accept evolution, and disregard the creation myth…[/quote]

What is easier, steal something or earn it? Work hard or have others do the work for you? Kill someone for their things or earn them yourself?

It isn’t like the world is getting better. Anyone can see that things have gotten much worse. You would think that if we were all evolving and becoming higher developed beings, that there would be less problems and not more.

834

[quote]ephrem wrote:

[quote]BackInAction wrote:

More specifically, for the betterment of your group. If everyone conducted themselves in self-serving ways, the group would suffer. IMO, moral actions are determined by the individual based on feedback on what is acceptable to others around you. Actions that are acceptable are those that are beneficial to the group (compassion, honesty, self-sacrifice). Actions that are not acceptable are not beneficial to the group (stealing, violence, dishonesty).

[/quote]

…i’ve discussed this on a number of threads, and with Pat, but it doesn’t sink in. In order to accept what you said here you’d have to accept evolution, and disregard the creation myth…[/quote]

What is easier, steal something or earn it? Work hard or have others do the work for you? Kill someone for their things or earn them yourself?

It isn’t like the world is getting better. Anyone can see that things have gotten much worse. You would think that if we were all evolving and becoming higher developed beings, that there would be less problems and not more.

835

632×557 55.6 KB

[quote]BackInAction wrote:
More specifically, for the betterment of your group. If everyone conducted themselves in self-serving ways, the group would suffer. IMO, moral actions are determined by the individual based on feedback on what is acceptable to others around you. Actions that are acceptable are those that are beneficial to the group (compassion, honesty, self-sacrifice). Actions that are not acceptable are not beneficial to the group (stealing, violence, dishonesty).[/quote]

You’ll find our reasons for being nice are still fundamentally self serving. It’s a somewhat more complex variation of you scratch my back, I’ll scratch yours. Your desire to protect other humans generally will be stronger when it comes to family, because they are more likely to be carrying the same genes. When we were living in tribes, chances were that you’d see the same people for the rest of your life - pissing them off by cheating them wouldn’t be a good idea. With exile and likely death as a punishment, natural selection would seem to have favored altruism toward relatives and in-laws. Unfortunately, this group favoritism mechanism has been hijacked by religion which has ultimately culminated in the sectarian warfare that is all to common around the world.

Why don’t we kill people with different genes? Well, that’s quite simple - killing them would remove genetic variability from our breeding options, whether directly or indirectly (i.e. killing a female or killing a male who a female you could have bred with is related to). With out a pick and mix approach to genes, we would eradicate ourselves quite quickly. However, self serving is a stronger factor in how we conduct ourselves. Which is why “tribalism” is such a strong factor in how humans act.

That said, we are evolved enough to think about these things and I find it extremely sad that people talk of the grandeur of “God” instead of taking a moment to look at the grandeur of life. The amount of people who could have been here instead of me or anyone reading this board is greater than the grains of the Sahara. All it would have taken to prevent your existence is a different sperm reaching the egg at any point in your ancestral tree. Stop wasting the precious time you have and go do something that isn’t akin to wishing for a dictatorship that punishes you for thoughtcrime.

836

[quote]honest_lifter wrote:

[quote]ephrem wrote:

[quote]BackInAction wrote:

More specifically, for the betterment of your group. If everyone conducted themselves in self-serving ways, the group would suffer. IMO, moral actions are determined by the individual based on feedback on what is acceptable to others around you. Actions that are acceptable are those that are beneficial to the group (compassion, honesty, self-sacrifice). Actions that are not acceptable are not beneficial to the group (stealing, violence, dishonesty).

[/quote]

…i’ve discussed this on a number of threads, and with Pat, but it doesn’t sink in. In order to accept what you said here you’d have to accept evolution, and disregard the creation myth…[/quote]

What is easier, steal something or earn it? Work hard or have others do the work for you? Kill someone for their things or earn them yourself?

It isn’t like the world is getting better. Anyone can see that things have gotten much worse. You would think that if we were all evolving and becoming higher developed beings, that there would be less problems and not more. [/quote]

…things haven’t gotten worse, humans have always been humans. The only difference is that we’re 6,5 billion strong and everything is exaggerated beyond recognition…

837

[quote]honest_lifter wrote:
What is easier, steal something or earn it? Work hard or have others do the work for you? Kill someone for their things or earn them yourself?

It isn’t like the world is getting better. Anyone can see that things have gotten much worse. You would think that if we were all evolving and becoming higher developed beings, that there would be less problems and not more. [/quote]

I’m sorry, but this is getting eerily close to sounding like fear of eternal punishment is what keeps you guys civil. Say it ain’t so!

And evolution isn’t something your going to track with your eyes, not with an 80 year lifespan. We are still animals, and the reptilian brain still comes out when the complex mammalian one is at a loss.

You seem like a reasonable guy. Head down to your library and start reading The Selfish Gene or Climbing Mount Improbable. The whole Watson/Crick revolution has served to provide us a theory that doesn’t rely so badly on sky hooks and myths. We’re at the stage that’s akin to a child realizing he has to give up his security blanket. Sure, they’ll be some backlash - but if we come out on the other side, we’ll be a better species for it.

838

It comes down to comparing apples to oranges. you are happy your way, I am happy mine. I wish you all the best.

839

[quote]honest_lifter wrote:
It comes down to comparing apples to oranges. you are happy your way, I am happy mine. I wish you all the best.[/quote]

Same to you.

840

[quote]BackInAction wrote:

[quote]honest_lifter wrote:

[quote]BackInAction wrote:

[quote]honest_lifter wrote:

[quote]BackInAction wrote:

[quote]honest_lifter wrote:

[quote]BackInAction wrote:

To summarize my whole point of this question: I’m trying to demonstrate that morality doesn’t necessitate religion. You could be just as moral without it.
[/quote]

Yes, you could be just as moral without religion.[/quote]

But I’m trying to figure out why you said you wouldn’t be without it.[/quote]

Why should I be as moral?[/quote]

For the betterment of those around you.
[/quote]

Why? What purpose?[/quote]

More specifically, for the betterment of your group. If everyone conducted themselves in self-serving ways, the group would suffer. IMO, moral actions are determined by the individual based on feedback on what is acceptable to others around you. Actions that are acceptable are those that are beneficial to the group (compassion, honesty, self-sacrifice). Actions that are not acceptable are not beneficial to the group (stealing, violence, dishonesty).

[/quote]

Yep, that’s exactly what Karl Marx espoused. Problem is things don’t work that way and they never will. It goes against human nature. Karl Marx was a very stupid man. Laughably stupid except that people that bought in to his philosophies killed millions for the betterment of man kind.
Humans are still animals, our actions must benefit us as animals, we’re just wired that way.

Why should I work really hard plowing my field, only to toss my yield into the community bin? Why should I behave in a way that is beneficial to others when it is not benefit to me?