Do you believe agnostics/atheists can be moral?

[Kaftan Barlast]

I was fiddling around facebook being bored, so I took a look at a thingie someone had made in which this was a question as part of a poitical quiz. But I just cant wrap my head around this question, are there really people out there who are so completely insane that they think ethics and morals are purely religious matters?

[Walsingham]

I was fiddling around facebook being bored, so I took a look at a thingie someone had made in which this was a question as part of a poitical quiz. But I just cant wrap my head around this question, are there really people out there who are so completely insane that they think ethics and morals are purely religious matters?

 

I'd answer in three parts:

 

1) I know moral atheists and agnostics

2) I think it shows poor awareness to suggest that morality as we understand it would have developed without religion

3) I think it is equally arrogant to suggest that every morality espoused by an atheist/agnostic is somehow better beause it is rooted in reason. Much of morality (but in my opinion not all of it) is rooted in axioms that move beyond possible reason

 

Four parts

 

4) It is possible that one could argue that if morality is based in reason then that reason must be focussed on what is best for the user. If that is the case then the behaviour is merely rational decison making and selfish, rather than moral. This may be the point of the thing you saw.

[Meshugger]

I am an atheist. Sad to say, i practice sodomy, cannibalism and murder. I lie and cheat to get what i want. My aim is chaos, genocide and depravity. I revel in greed, hatred, envy and lust.

 

If only a god would smite me down and make me change my ways, i would do so in order to get into heaven.

[Walsingham]

I am an atheist. Sad to say, i practice sodomy, cannibalism and murder. I lie and cheat to get what i want. My aim is chaos, genocide and depravity. I revel in greed, hatred, envy and lust.

 

You have realised that the dating website is the OTHER browser window?

[Calax]

I was fiddling around facebook being bored, so I took a look at a thingie someone had made in which this was a question as part of a poitical quiz. But I just cant wrap my head around this question, are there really people out there who are so completely insane that they think ethics and morals are purely religious matters?

Simply put, yes. In general I've found that usually such people are also ones who deny evolution and talk about things like a six day creation, a global flood, how the grand canyon was formed in about 6 hours due to said flood....

 

for a quick look at other stupidity:

 

[Meshugger]

I am an atheist. Sad to say, i practice sodomy, cannibalism and murder. I lie and cheat to get what i want. My aim is chaos, genocide and depravity. I revel in greed, hatred, envy and lust.

 

You have realised that the dating website is the OTHER browser window?

 

I date wherever i want to date, i am rebel. Shut up, you are not my dad, you have no authority, YOU ARE NOT GOD!

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Kaftan Barlast]

I was fiddling around facebook being bored, so I took a look at a thingie someone had made in which this was a question as part of a poitical quiz. But I just cant wrap my head around this question, are there really people out there who are so completely insane that they think ethics and morals are purely religious matters?

 

I'd answer in three parts:

 

1) I know moral atheists and agnostics

2) I think it shows poor awareness to suggest that morality as we understand it would have developed without religion

3) I think it is equally arrogant to suggest that every morality espoused by an atheist/agnostic is somehow better beause it is rooted in reason. Much of morality (but in my opinion not all of it) is rooted in axioms that move beyond possible reason

 

Four parts

 

4) It is possible that one could argue that if morality is based in reason then that reason must be focussed on what is best for the user. If that is the case then the behaviour is merely rational decison making and selfish, rather than moral. This may be the point of the thing you saw.

 

1) Me too

 

2) I would say that morals and ethics are rooted in reason and biology. It's my belief that religons such as Buddhism, Christianity and Islam were created by rational people as a means to carry ethics and morale to the wide masses without having to sit down and have a profound philosophical seminar with every single individual. With the western enlightenment, we began to become so civilised that we no longer require religion to explain why we shouldnt behave like idiots.

The biological part is just natural traits that ensure our success as a species; we have a natural instinct to co-operate rather than compete for food etc.

 

3) I would say that decent behaviour by your own free will, is worth a whole lot more than decent behaviour because you believe you will be punished by a deity. If the only thing keeping you from stealing your friends girlfriend, is a belief that you will be divinely punished if you do, you're a jerk. Relating to axioms in moral philosophy, I have to read up and get back to you on that.

 

4) Rational moral behaviour is not always rooted in self-benefit. It can be anything from biologic empathical ability, to the intellectual recognition fo the fact that a measure of altruism is necessary for society to function.

[Guest The Architect]

That's like asking, "Do you believe Christians can be immoral?"

[Tale]

It's an interesting concept for what it implies about the person asking. There's the obvious implication that the asker is only moral by threat. I can't recall the name of the cognitive bias, but there's one where people tend to overestimate others similarity to themselves. I've read of interesting studies where you get people to accurately describe themselves by having them describe assumptions of other people.

[Orogun01]

That's like asking, "Do you believe Christians can be immoral?"

And the answer is an emphatic YES

[Wrath of Dagon]

There's a difference between morality and ethics. Religion teaches you ethics, and they are taught in other ways as well. The difference between right and wrong is probably mostly instinctual, and to some extent is also learned in childhood from socialization.

[Guest The Architect]

It's an interesting concept for what it implies about the person asking. There's the obvious implication that the asker is only moral by threat. I can't recall the name of the cognitive bias, but there's one where people tend to overestimate others similarity to themselves.

 

The false consensus event?

[Walsingham]

2) I would say that morals and ethics are rooted in reason and biology. It's my belief that religons such as Buddhism, Christianity and Islam were created by rational people as a means to carry ethics and morale to the wide masses without having to sit down and have a profound philosophical seminar with every single individual. With the western enlightenment, we began to become so civilised that we no longer require religion to explain why we shouldnt behave like idiots.

The biological part is just natural traits that ensure our success as a species; we have a natural instinct to co-operate rather than compete for food etc.

 

3) I would say that decent behaviour by your own free will, is worth a whole lot more than decent behaviour because you believe you will be punished by a deity. If the only thing keeping you from stealing your friends girlfriend, is a belief that you will be divinely punished if you do, you're a jerk. Relating to axioms in moral philosophy, I have to read up and get back to you on that.

 

4) Rational moral behaviour is not always rooted in self-benefit. It can be anything from biologic empathical ability, to the intellectual recognition fo the fact that a measure of altruism is necessary for society to function.

 

2) makes sense. but I think you may be underestimating the role played by theologians in at least western philosophy. Or I may be overestimating it.

3) Not all religions, and certainly not even all christians look upon God as a punishment thing. To be fair. Many argue that God is love, and that disobedience is a question of denying one the fruits of his love. Stop me if I've got that wrong. *

4) I might accept that empathy is an altruistic component in morality. I can't see how building a stronger society - assuming you live in it - isn't selfish.

 

 

*I suppose that by either definition that would make the faithful merely self serving as well. Unless... they argued that God being creator of the universe, by obeying God's dictats they were at one with the universe, and hence the behaviour was more abstract

[Volourn]

of course they can true morality comes from the individual

[Darth InSidious]

There's a difference between morality and ethics. Religion teaches you ethics, and they are taught in other ways as well. The difference between right and wrong is probably mostly instinctual, and to some extent is also learned in childhood from socialization.

This is a load of gibberish that shows only a dim awareness of metaethics. Attempts to play semantic games to justify a weak position show up a fundamental lack of understanding of the terms employed.

 

D-

Edited September 28, 2010 by Darth InSidious

[Wrath of Dagon]

There's a difference between morality and ethics. Religion teaches you ethics, and they are taught in other ways as well. The difference between right and wrong is probably mostly instinctual, and to some extent is also learned in childhood from socialization.

This is a load of gibberish that shows only a dim awareness of metaethics. Attempts to play semantic games to justify a weak position show up a fundamental lack of understanding of the terms employed.

 

D-

I didn't say anything about metaethics, whatever that is.

[Rostere]

I am an atheist/agnostic and I only follow my own moral law. I guess that at least followers of Christianity must answer no to topic's question, since the religion demands that you believe in God.

 

4) It is possible that one could argue that if morality is based in reason then that reason must be focussed on what is best for the user. If that is the case then the behaviour is merely rational decison making and selfish, rather than moral. This may be the point of the thing you saw.

 

I wonder what kind of reason that is. Why whould reason necessarily entail that you would do things for your own good? No, a morality based in something else than religion requires goals, you could impossibly make a moral law out of reason itself. Suppose a person holds no regard for his own life, then by his reason he could sacrifice himself for any cause he thinks is important. Are you really saying there is an objective reason, in which it is of every single beings interest to be selfish?

[Zoraptor]

I'd just point out that the question itself is potentially at least a perfectly sound one in the context of a survey. It's basically asking what percentage of respondents are religious fundamentalists without forcing them to self identify as such and without making the question denominational- you'd get the same answer most likely from strongly religious Jews, Muslims, Christians and even some of the more ideological adherents of eastern religions. There are a bunch of techniques used in surveys to get accurate information that is not always going to be disclosed willingly, and to do things like check for people who are just filling in stuff randomly.

 

Or of course it could just be a loaded question in a bad survey.

[Orogun01]

I'd just point out that the question itself is potentially at least a perfectly sound one in the context of a survey. It's basically asking what percentage of respondents are religious fundamentalists without forcing them to self identify as such and without making the question denominational- you'd get the same answer most likely from strongly religious Jews, Muslims, Christians and even some of the more ideological adherents of eastern religions. There are a bunch of techniques used in surveys to get accurate information that is not always going to be disclosed willingly, and to do things like check for people who are just filling in stuff randomly.

 

Or of course it could just be a loaded question in a bad survey.

It wouldn't be an effective way to determine it, since most derpaherp are going to scratch their head and say what's an agnostic? Or they really have not contact with people outside their religious communities, but this doesn't make them fundamentalists. Just extremists.

[Gorth]

Hey, even a blind chicken finds a kernel of corn every now and then, why couldn't a survey do it accentally?

 

Speaking of chicken, it probably is a chicken vs. egg problem. Did the moral values influence the religion or did the religion influence the moral values. I always believed that religion was a product of the time and place where it was created, reflecting what was acceptable at the time. As times change, sometimes the religion does too. We generally don't chop off the right hands of thieves, stone adulterers to death or sacrifice a 1000 prisoners every spring to ensure a good harvest at the end of summer.

 

Continuing that line of thought, agnostics/atheists can be **** like everybody else.

[Tigranes]

I am an atheist/agnostic and I only follow my own moral law. I guess that at least followers of Christianity must answer no to topic's question, since the religion demands that you believe in God.

 

I find it rather interesting how many atheists/agnostics often speak from a defensive position when asked things like this (and, to be fair, the original facebook question is ludicrous), and then feel like they can't resist a swipe at various religions in the process of their own defence. It's like an atheist's self-proclamation of validity isn't complete without a comforting assertion that 'the other side' is a bunch of idiot sheep.

 

Of course the vast majority of atheists/agnostics will have a sense of morality, and I don't see why the millions of not-crazy Christians wouldn't see that (or 'can't accept it').

 

Anyway, didn't Kaftan just post for a laff?

[Gorth]

Anyway, didn't Kaftan just post for a laff?

It was posted on the internet. You wouldn't want to laugh at somehing posted on the internet would you? It is serious business!

[Calax]

There's a difference between morality and ethics. Religion teaches you ethics, and they are taught in other ways as well. The difference between right and wrong is probably mostly instinctual, and to some extent is also learned in childhood from socialization.

Morality is a code of ethics. It's just that ethics are usually more hard bound and relate to things that might or might not be morally good or evil in the standard shape of things.

 

That said, Religion teaches you the same stuff you learn from anywhere else, it just also has a subtext of bringing you into a grouping that people find desireable.

[Orogun01]

Hey, even a blind chicken finds a kernel of corn every now and then, why couldn't a survey do it accentally?

 

Speaking of chicken, it probably is a chicken vs. egg problem. Did the moral values influence the religion or did the religion influence the moral values. I always believed that religion was a product of the time and place where it was created, reflecting what was acceptable at the time. As times change, sometimes the religion does too. We generally don't chop off the right hands of thieves, stone adulterers to death or sacrifice a 1000 prisoners every spring to ensure a good harvest at the end of summer.

 

Continuing that line of thought, agnostics/atheists can be **** like everybody else.

Accidentally of course, as long as we do not take it like a source of reliable data.

 

You are right religion does change with both culture and the times. In fact many of the rituals, practices and belief that religions hold today have been assimilated from coming into contact with different cultures.

 

PS. Harvest has been ****ty this year, maybe we do need a sacrifice

[lord of flies]

2) I think it shows poor awareness to suggest that morality as we understand it would have developed without religion

3) I think it is equally arrogant to suggest that every morality espoused by an atheist/agnostic is somehow better beause it is rooted in reason. Much of morality (but in my opinion not all of it) is rooted in axioms that move beyond possible reason

Let's face it, folks. People's morality is neither reasoned nor codified. Have you ever heard the old moral question of "you can save five men from a speeding train, but you have to kill one"? Well it turns out that if you shift and alter elements of that question while maintaining the mathematical inequality, people answer differently.

 

For example, in a recent test, "[h]alf of the participants received a version of the scenario where the agent could choose to sacrifice an individual named