Posts: 161
Threads: 16
Joined: November 8, 2009
Reputation:
6
Challenge - Scientific reason for being moral.
September 21, 2010 at 12:08 am
(This post was last modified: September 23, 2010 at 9:33 am by Mr Camel.)
A Christian friend of mine has set me a challenge –
He says I need a scientific reason for being moral and for living by the secular humanism philosophy. He believes I must have no reason other than a scientific one because I use science to rationalize my claims about the existence of any deities.
I’m not sure how to answer this because I haven’t yet explored it properly. I’m not entirely sure if there really does have to be a scientific reason... I mean... I guess so. But how would I go about answering this?
On spot, I said my scientific reason is because it works... and it’s been proven. Because helping others works for the benefit of my own race and has proved equally beneficial for myself.
He didn’t seem to think that was valid... he didn’t even give me a reason why. Of course, I’m not simply thinking my argument isn’t valid...
I would like to be able to build a better argument...
"We need not a God; just another human being to give life a meaning. For people are truly all people have" author unknown
Posts: 7388
Threads: 168
Joined: February 25, 2009
Reputation:
45
RE: Challenge - Scientific reason for being moral.
September 21, 2010 at 12:45 am
Quote:He says I need a scientific reason for being moral and for living by the secular humanism philosophy.
No, you don't.
Your friend is an ignoramus,I really wouldn't bother Be.like trying to communicate with an Orangutang. However,if you must:
Refer him to the notion of ETHICS, aka moral philosophy,based on reason,not science..,
Quote:Ethics (also known as moral philosophy) is a branch of philosophy that addresses questions about morality — that is, concepts such as good and evil, right and wrong, justice, virtue, etc.
Major branches of ethics include:
Meta-ethics, about the theoretical meaning and reference of moral propositions and how their truth-values (if any) may be determined;
Normative ethics, about the practical means of determining a moral course of action;
Applied ethics, about how moral outcomes can be achieved in specific situations;
Moral psychology, about how moral capacity or moral agency develops and what its nature is; and
Descriptive ethics, about what moral values people actually abide by.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moral_philosophy
Posts: 361
Threads: 22
Joined: June 21, 2010
Reputation:
13
RE: Challenge - Scientific reason for being moral.
September 21, 2010 at 1:34 am
Scientific answer.
Quote:Many that live deserve death. Some that die deserve life. Can you give it to them, Frodo? Do not be too eager to deal out death in judgment. Even the very wise cannot see all ends.
Gandalf The Gray.
Posts: 4446
Threads: 87
Joined: December 2, 2009
Reputation:
47
RE: Challenge - Scientific reason for being moral.
September 21, 2010 at 12:37 pm
@Padriac- So reason alone is indicative without scientifc evidence? I think the point was to defend his lack of scientific evidence of the existance of God.
In the video it says... "Where ever else it comes from it's not from scripture" when if some use scripture to better their own personal morality. Those individuals are then part of society which shapes societal morality. Societal Morality is at least partially based on the Bible (or at the very least people who use the Bible). His contention is that any influence from the Bible would be counter productive to furthering altruis, but one of the key proponents of Biblical teachings are to love thy neighbor as you would want to be loved. Seems to be an inaccurate and unfounded statement.
"There ought to be a term that would designate those who actually follow the teachings of Jesus, since the word 'Christian' has been largely divorced from those teachings, and so polluted by fundamentalists that it has come to connote their polar opposite: intolerance, vindictive hatred, and bigotry." -- Philip Stater, Huffington Post
always working on cleaning my windows- me regarding Johari
Posts: 13900
Threads: 262
Joined: January 11, 2009
Reputation:
82
RE: Challenge - Scientific reason for being moral.
September 21, 2010 at 2:07 pm
(September 21, 2010 at 12:08 am)Scott Richens Wrote: A Christian friend of mine has set me a challenge –
He says I need a scientific reason for being moral and for living by the secular humanism philosophy. He believes I must have no reason other than a scientific one because I use science to rationalize my claims about the existence of any deities.
I’m not sure how to answer this because I haven’t yet explored it properly. I’m not entirely sure if there really does have to be a scientific reason... I mean... I guess so. But how would I go about answering this?
On spot, I said my scientific reason is because it works... and it’s been proven. Because helping others works for the benefit of my own race and has proved equally beneficial for myself.
He didn’t seem to think that was valid... he didn’t even give me a reason why. Of course, I’m not simply thinking my argument isn’t valid... I think the problem is mainly him... he doesn’t want to hear it and just blocks it out. He wants to have me stumped. I would like to be able to build a better argument...
Scientific answer
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_evolution
You can fix ignorance, you can't fix stupid.
Tinkety Tonk and down with the Nazis.
Posts: 870
Threads: 32
Joined: June 19, 2010
Reputation:
3
RE: Challenge - Scientific reason for being moral.
September 21, 2010 at 3:23 pm
(September 21, 2010 at 12:37 pm)tackattack Wrote: @Padriac- So reason alone is indicative without scientifc evidence? I think the point was to defend his lack of scientific evidence of the existance of God.
In the video it says... "Where ever else it comes from it's not from scripture" when if some use scripture to better their own personal morality. Those individuals are then part of society which shapes societal morality. Societal Morality is at least partially based on the Bible (or at the very least people who use the Bible). His contention is that any influence from the Bible would be counter productive to furthering altruis, but one of the key proponents of Biblical teachings are to love thy neighbor as you would want to be loved. Seems to be an inaccurate and unfounded statement.
The moss copied 7 commandments from the Egyptian book of the dead
Posts: 130
Threads: 7
Joined: September 8, 2010
Reputation:
2
RE: Challenge - Scientific reason for being moral.
September 21, 2010 at 3:27 pm
(September 21, 2010 at 12:08 am)Scott Richens Wrote: A Christian friend of mine has set me a challenge –
He says I need a scientific reason for being moral and for living by the secular humanism philosophy. He believes I must have no reason other than a scientific one because I use science to rationalize my claims about the existence of any deities.
He didn’t seem to think that was valid... he didn’t even give me a reason why. Of course, I’m not simply thinking my argument isn’t valid... I think the problem is mainly him... he doesn’t want to hear it and just blocks it out. He wants to have me stumped. I would like to be able to build a better argument...
It's pretty simple how to answer this- firstly your friend (although why you want to be friends with a person like that is beyond me) needs to be reminded that you don't have to explain or justify your position. Your views are based on logic and common sense, and common sense has been around far longer than the idea of gods, christianity or supposed morality. A neanderthal understood that if he stuck a spear in his friend, his friend would die, therefore he wouldn't do it. That is common sense.
Christians love to claim a monopoly on morality, but they have no basis for this whatsoever.
Furthermore, after many attempts myself, I would no longer bother trying to deconvert a christian. Because frankly this planet was ours long before it was taken over by the sheep and their god of delusions; it's christianity that is the new kid on the block, not atheists, and the way it swaggers about proclaiming hither and dither is well deserving of an ass kicking.
Posts: 403
Threads: 10
Joined: August 16, 2010
Reputation:
10
RE: Challenge - Scientific reason for being moral.
September 21, 2010 at 3:30 pm
(This post was last modified: September 21, 2010 at 3:30 pm by Entropist.)
Who needs a scientific answer when you have George Carlin?
“Society is not a disease, it is a disaster. What a stupid miracle that one can live in it.” ~ E.M. Cioran
Posts: 4446
Threads: 87
Joined: December 2, 2009
Reputation:
47
RE: Challenge - Scientific reason for being moral.
September 21, 2010 at 3:34 pm
Ashendant.. back up your claim with specifics.. I count maybe 3 at a stretch.
"There ought to be a term that would designate those who actually follow the teachings of Jesus, since the word 'Christian' has been largely divorced from those teachings, and so polluted by fundamentalists that it has come to connote their polar opposite: intolerance, vindictive hatred, and bigotry." -- Philip Stater, Huffington Post
always working on cleaning my windows- me regarding Johari
Posts: 130
Threads: 7
Joined: September 8, 2010
Reputation:
2
RE: Challenge - Scientific reason for being moral.
September 21, 2010 at 3:41 pm
(September 21, 2010 at 3:34 pm)tackattack Wrote: Ashendant.. back up your claim with specifics.. I count maybe 3 at a stretch.
He's right, I already brought this up recently ..
http://atheistforums.org/thread-4684.html
|