Where do atheists get their morality from?

[Cyberman]

@Atom: I'm not sure what you mean about "watching the complete indifference of animals to pain and suffering in each other seems to contradict the idea that humans being social animals, explains why humans value caring for each other." If this means what I think it does, have you ever seen the behaviour of, say, a pack of dogs fighting another? Or a band (not flange!) of gorillas defending their territory? Social animals, those who form and act together in groups for mutual protection and other benefits, certainly don't just watch pain and suffering in each other with complete indifference. I have seen footage of chimpanzees mourning their dead, or at least behaving in a way which we would recognise as mourning, or comforting an injured comrade.

At one point our family had three dogs of varying ages: Elly (rough collie cross) the new kid on the block; William (Welsh Springer spaniel) the cocky teen; and Ben (???) the Min of the bunch. When Ben died, both William and Elly behaved in a manner consistent with mourning; they kept very quiet, were very reserved and even 'respectfully' avoided using Ben's food bowl. Much the same sort of thing happened with Elly on her own when William died years later. Now of course much of this they could have picked up from the way we were behaving, and it's all too easy to anthropomorphise non-human reactions. Also they were missing a playmate. Still, their behaviour and similar ones I have observed in other animals, particularly footage of those in the wild with no human interaction, cannot in all honesty be dismissed so quickly.

On a final note, I have to say that I do wish you would refrain from this notion of "evolutionary explanations for morality". Evolution may, in fact almost certainly must, play a part in developing systems of morality, but a part is not the whole picture. Put it this way. One human child growing up in the jungle all by itself, assuming it knew enough to find food and water, shelter and so on, probably won't develop much of a moral code beyond "must kill or else be killed". Put a whole group of children in the jungle to fend for themselves and suddenly the picture has changed; now you've got a species-related tribe all looking out for each other. If they hunt as a group, the reward is more food to go around, better animal skins to fashion into clothing to keep warm. If an individual acts against the interests of the group, say steals more food than s/he needs such that others go hungry, that individual may be better off for their selfish actions but the tribe as a whole suffers; now everyone goes hungry until the next dangerous hunt, which some of them might not survive. It's not too much of a stretch to picture that individual being banished from the group for their transgression - or worse, being killed and perhaps eaten.

In other words, yes evolution may be at play. However, species that evolve to be social animals, unless they have some special gift such as venom or pointy teeth and the nous to use them efficiently, are always going to have the edge over their environment. It follows that what we like to call morality develops from that group instinct as an emergent property. I don't know as I can put it any more plainly without repeating myself or treating my audience (is there anybody there..?) as total morons.