Hi everyone, first post and not sure which topic area to put this in, or forum etiquette, its not really a question but something for discussion, but here it goes.

Its basically a concept I have been grappling with for a while. For those of us who aren't religious or live in secular societies, it would appear that their is a significant correlation with the decline in morality, and the decline in religion. In the past In my country, Christianity provided a "moral guideline" if you will for how we should live our lives. And through the fear of hell, or living in religious society or whatever, it kept people in line/ under control through these guidlines. It would appear that as people have lost faith, their moral standards have declined dramatically, many adopting a mentality of "why". That is to say, "why is it wrong" "why shouldn't I behave like this" "why should you tell me whats right and wrong". Which from an atheistic/agnostic viewpoint, it is very difficult to tell them otherwise, as if there is no God and if religion is a farce, then who is to say that the way they are living/behaving is wrong?

At the same time the whole concept of morality and right and wrong comes from religion/religious teachings. So apart from religion, there isn't really any other "guidelines" for us to go off. Even religion itself or even christianity seems to have deviated somewhat from the bible in order to keep its following in modern society. What some sects consider immoral, others would consider to be okay in the modern world.

So I guess what im getting at can we have morality within modern secular society? Or is religion the only real way to keep us all in line? And from an atheist viewpoint, can anything really be considered as immoral? Even if we see man made laws, most of it seems to derive from religion, do not kill, do not steal etc. Also perhaps highlights the concept that religion itself was a basic understanding of man in old times, of law an order. And that a system had to be in place to keep us all in order. otherwise we would be running riot "doing as we please."

Apologies if this is a little bit all over the place, but would appreciate some thoughts.... thank you.

(August 31, 2011 at 7:26 am)TeslaTrooper Wrote: Its basically a concept I have been grappling with for a while. For those of us who aren't religious or live in secular societies, it would appear that their is a significant correlation with the decline in morality, and the decline in religion. In the past In my country, Christianity provided a "moral guideline" if you will for how we should live our lives. And through the fear of hell, or living in religious society or whatever, it kept people in line/ under control through these guidlines. It would appear that as people have lost faith, their moral standards have declined dramatically, many adopting a mentality of "why". That is to say, "why is it wrong" "why shouldn't I behave like this" "why should you tell me whats right and wrong". Which from an atheistic/agnostic viewpoint, it is very difficult to tell them otherwise, as if there is no God and if religion is a farce, then who is to say that the way they are living/behaving is wrong?

Statistical data, please?

People are no worse now than they were in the past. A more than cursory glance into a thoroughly researched history book would have told you that.

(August 31, 2011 at 7:26 am)TeslaTrooper Wrote: At the same time the whole concept of morality and right and wrong comes from religion/religious teachings. So apart from religion, there isn't really any other "guidelines" for us to go off. Even religion itself or even christianity seems to have deviated somewhat from the bible in order to keep its following in modern society. What some sects consider immoral, others would consider to be okay in the modern world.

So I guess what im getting at can we have morality within modern secular society? Or is religion the only real way to keep us all in line? And from an atheist viewpoint, can anything really be considered as immoral? Even if we see man made laws, most of it seems to derive from religion, do not kill, do not steal etc. Also perhaps highlights the concept that religion itself was a basic understanding of man in old times, of law an order. And that a system had to be in place to keep us all in order. otherwise we would be running riot "doing as we please."

We have an objective morality thread somewhere in here....

I do not fear hell nor do I fear death......


What I do fear is the mental, physical repercussions of my actions in the real world.

I know it is wrong to steal not because God said its wrong to but because I know I wouldn't want to be stolen from therefore I practice what I preach.

The problem you have with a specific divine law such as "thou shall not steal" is.... what if you steal food or money from someone who has plenty and won't give it willingly to feed your family who are starving through no fault of your own? Does that same law apply? Who are we to break such a law commanded by God, no matter the reason?

Kind Regards,

Citereh

Well I can imagine it would be very difficult to find statistical data on morality, as how would you first of all define it, and then quantify it? Also morality in secular terms is subjective. I guess I should have narrowed my parameters to better explain myself. I would say the decline in morality or (perceived morality) since the 1950s to present day. To me it seems to be more widespread and open than it once was. Whether in some ways that is a good thing or not is debatable. It seems to me that we have lost a wholesomeness in society. But whether or not that is due to a decline in religion is also debatable, but I feel it is.

But once again the difficulty I find is by which standard is morality being judged at? Christianity, Islam, Judaism, Atheism? What is morally permissable in one religion, culture, society is not in another. But for me personally there are some actions that are morally wrong in any of the above religions/viewpoints. Yet although immoral are not neccesarily illegal in some societies. But again morality seems to stem from religious teachings. So if we do not have religion, who is to say it is immoral.


..... I feel like im going round in circles in my head with this stuff lol.

---

(August 31, 2011 at 8:33 am)Citereh Wrote: I do not fear hell nor do I fear death......


What I do fear is the mental, physical repercussions of my actions in the real world.

I know it is wrong to steal not because God said its wrong to but because I know I wouldn't want to be stolen from therefore I practice what I preach.

The problem you have with a specific divine law such as "thou shall not steal" is.... what if you steal food or money from someone who has plenty and won't give it willingly to feed your family who are starving through no fault of your own? Does that same law apply? Who are we to break such a law commanded by God, no matter the reason?

Kind Regards,

Citereh

Well I feel that is one of the reasons why having such commandments set in stone is wrong. But the same time I feel morality and legality are too different things. Like you said, to steal to feed your family may be illegal, but may not be interpreted as immoral. So without religion's guidance, how can we judge what is immoral? I guess the best thing we can go on is legality. But laws change. What was once illegal may no be legal. Such as homosexuality. If things arent set in stone, surely we are only moving "the goal posts" around to suit our own needs. Which would also highlight the concept that there is no such thing as moral certainty.

You ARE going around in circles. If you're going to say there's a decline in morality, then you need to quantify it before we can have a discussion.

In the not so distant past, it was perfectly acceptable to kill another man in a duel over "honor". Nowadays we frown on that. Murder rates are down. Whether or not drug use is up or down is entirely dependent on which news channel you're watching.

As for wholesomeness - please go back and watch movies from the 50's or 60's with a new eye. Mad Men is a pretty excellent portrayal of the reality of that "wholesomeness." Just watching "Bell Book and Candle" the other day reminded me of the rampant drinking going on. And while it was never implicitly said, sex was quite pervasive throughout the movie. The 50's were uptight, but they were NOT the way they were portrayed in the Leave It to Beaver series. The KKK existed. People were still greedy. People still had sex outside of marriage or before it. It was no worse or better than the uptight period before it - the Victorians, who basically refined the art of pornography and allowed child prostitution to run amuck.

Please explain exactly what you think society has lost in the last 60 years before making such a generalization.

Have you tried honestly asking yourself, whether you think you would be a worser person if you did not have a religious set of laws on morality to abide to? Bearing in mind as you said how much they differ in certain cases.

That might be a bad question to ask on my part as you'll probably answer yes lol. But the point i'm getting at as I said in my previous post is that through empathetic reasoning you can decide what is right or wrong to do without a God to give you a very brief and specific lesson on morality.

Is there any evidence to suggest as a species that we were more "immoral" centuries before abrahamic religions took there grip on countries? I don't think so, as there were religions before them who would have in my opinion advocated equally distastful teachings and laws.


Kind Regards,

Citereh

(August 31, 2011 at 8:57 am)thesummerqueen Wrote: You ARE going around in circles. If you're going to say there's a decline in morality, then you need to quantify it before we can have a discussion.

In the not so distant past, it was perfectly acceptable to kill another man in a duel over "honor". Nowadays we frown on that. Murder rates are down. Whether or not drug use is up or down is entirely dependent on which news channel you're watching.

As for wholesomeness - please go back and watch movies from the 50's or 60's with a new eye. Mad Men is a pretty excellent portrayal of the reality of that "wholesomeness." Just watching "Bell Book and Candle" the other day reminded me of the rampant drinking going on. And while it was never implicitly said, sex was quite pervasive throughout the movie. The 50's were uptight, but they were NOT the way they were portrayed in the Leave It to Beaver series. The KKK existed. People were still greedy. People still had sex outside of marriage or before it. It was no worse or better than the uptight period before it - the Victorians, who basically refined the art of pornography and allowed child prostitution to run amuck.

Please explain exactly what you think society has lost in the last 60 years before making such a generalization.

Well once again I think it is debatable. If we were to go on figures in terms of population, then and now, for 100% sure I feel those figures you talk about such as drugs, crime etc would be up. But again I feel those are legal issues not immoral issues. Of course those things still happened in those times too, but to me it feels like it is more widespread at the moment. Whether that is because their is less oppression or things are more open now, is also debatable. It still is impossible to quantify. For example how can you quantify how many people act in a "lewd and uncouth" manner? It is subjective as to what "lewd or uncouth" may be, and it is not illegal, so you cannot quantify it.

Perhaps it is the openness which makes it seem like it is happening more now than then. Perhaps what we saw in public back then was a facade, to what was really happening behind closed doors. Perhaps that is what I have a problem with. In that what is socially acceptable now, was not socially acceptable then. Once that boundary of "acceptability" has been breached, I beleive it opens the floodgates for immorality to prosper (depending on your interpretation of immorality).

An analogy For example, here in the u.k there has been a big debate on "legal drugs." More people have been experimenting with legal drugs, because they are legal. those people would not use illegal drugs for the very fact that they are illegal. Similarly, if boundaries on morality were strictly in place it may stop people from engaging in immoral acts, because that boundary was there i.e religion. Once the boundary has been removed, it allows immorality to be engaged in.

---

(August 31, 2011 at 9:00 am)Citereh Wrote: Have you tried honestly asking yourself, whether you think you would be a worser person if you did not have a religious set of laws on morality to abide to? Bearing in mind as you said how much they differ in certain cases.

That might be a bad question to ask on my part as you'll probably answer yes lol. But the point i'm getting at as I said in my previous post is that through empathetic reasoning you can decide what is right or wrong to do without a God to give you a very brief and specific lesson on morality.

Is there any evidence to suggest as a species that we were more "immoral" centuries before abrahamic religions took there grip on countries? I don't think so, as there were religions before them who would have in my opinion advocated equally distastful teachings and laws.


Kind Regards,

Citereh

Well I honestly think I would be a worse person if it were not for religious teachings. As a young boy we were taught religion and "right and wrong" in school. These foundations are present in us even in adulthood.

Of course there is no evidence to suggest that as a species we were more immoral before abrahamic religions took hold in the world. Mostly due to the fact that the concept of morality had not yet been devised. So to go up to another human, bash them on the head and kill them, steal their food and wife, would I guess be acceptable. I guess survival was the rule of law, not what is moral or immoral. As we see when law and order breaks down, people act immorally. For example the U.K riots recently.

I feel that even atheists who act decently, are going on the religious precedent set before them.

.......my heads spinning and I have to go offline, will hopefully pick all this up tommorow. Thank you for replies peeps.

(August 31, 2011 at 7:26 am)TeslaTrooper Wrote: Hi everyone, first post and not sure which topic area to put this in, or forum etiquette, its not really a question but something for discussion, but here it goes.

Its basically a concept I have been grappling with for a while. For those of us who aren't religious or live in secular societies, it would appear that their is a significant correlation with the decline in morality, and the decline in religion. In the past In my country, Christianity provided a "moral guideline" if you will for how we should live our lives. And through the fear of hell, or living in religious society or whatever, it kept people in line/ under control through these guidlines. It would appear that as people have lost faith, their moral standards have declined dramatically, many adopting a mentality of "why". That is to say, "why is it wrong" "why shouldn't I behave like this" "why should you tell me whats right and wrong". Which from an atheistic/agnostic viewpoint, it is very difficult to tell them otherwise, as if there is no God and if religion is a farce, then who is to say that the way they are living/behaving is wrong?

Going to have to disagree quite strongly. More secular societies are actually far more peaceful than religious ones. More law biding and productive. Sweden has a 85% non-religious population, and it's ranked as one of the top most peaceful nations in the world. Very religious nations and societies have been found to be quite violent and dis-orderly.

Morality does not come from religion. I've never committed a single crime throughout my life, maybe one little mistake as a very young lad but that's all and yet I've never been religious. Atheist all my life.
Teaching right from wrong isn't too difficult.
Like how my uncle taught his kids. When his kids vandalise property, he damages their property then asked them "how do you like it when it's done to you?". He's with the 'treat others how you would like to be treated' approach. Works. If your kids destroy property, destroy some of theirs. Or sell it to cover the damages.
I used to throw stones at cars as they drove by when I was little, till I learnt how to put myself in their shoes. I saw the wrong and corrected myself. Never was religion required, only for the weak minded.
So no, the decline of religious influence does not cause the sense of morality to decline also. Intelligence is the best form of morality, not fear.

First of all, religion is a shite idea of morality control. People still do all sorts of things no matter what religion they subscribe to.

Second, it sounds as if you're not entirely against certain things being done because their immorality is debatable, you just don't want it out in public. Now THAT is something to discuss. Are you uncomfortable with certain things?

Personally, I prefer more things to be out in the open. My mother's habit of pretending I've never had sex is rather annoying. I often say that if my last man had knocked me up, she would have preferred to imagine it happened through some magical process of his sperm growing little wings and seeking me out from all the way across a mansion sized house. This ludicrous attitude has led to all sorts of body issues. "Morality" has more consequences than just social control.

(August 31, 2011 at 7:26 am)TeslaTrooper Wrote: For those of us who aren't religious or live in secular societies, it would appear that their is a significant correlation with the decline in morality, and the decline in religion.

Even if this is true (and I don't think it is) correlation does not indicate causation.

Quote:In the past In my country, Christianity provided a "moral guideline" if you will for how we should live our lives.

As do all religions. And often times their "moral guideline" is quite barbaric.

Quote:And through the fear of hell, or living in religious society or whatever, it kept people in line/ under control through these guidlines.

Yes, because religion preys on superstition, fear and ignorance.

Quote:It would appear that as people have lost faith, their moral standards have declined dramatically

Completely disagree. I know atheists who are upstanding people. I also know believers who are louses.

Quote:That is to say, "why is it wrong" "why shouldn't I behave like this" "why should you tell me whats right and wrong".

It can be a good thing to question authority. This is how unjust laws get changed.

Quote:Which from an atheistic/agnostic viewpoint, it is very difficult to tell them otherwise,

Not at all. Society cannot flourish if people run around harming others at will. Imagine a society with no laws. It would be chaos.

Quote:if there is no God and if religion is a farce, then who is to say that the way they are living/behaving is wrong?

Why do we need people who claim to speak for a deity telling us what to do?

Quote:At the same time the whole concept of morality and right and wrong comes from religion/religious teachings.

WRONG! Early human societies did not get their laws from religion. I would even go so far as to say that religions got their morality from the societies that spawned them.

Quote:So apart from religion, there isn't really any other "guidelines" for us to go off.

Are you kidding? "The golden rule" predates the Bible. How about the "guideline" that you shouldn't harm others without just cause? I think this rule can be found in virtually ANY society from any place or era.

I must also point out the wonderful "guidelines" that religion has provided throughout history. According to religion, it has been acceptable to keep slaves, kill nonbelievers, oppress women, deny basic rights, wage war, commit atrocities, etc, etc... The "moral guidelines" of religion have resulted in untold suffering throughout history.

Quote:Even religion itself or even christianity seems to have deviated somewhat from the bible in order to keep its following in modern society. What some sects consider immoral, others would consider to be okay in the modern world.

Which kind of proves that the idea of a singular "lawgiver" is bullshit. Otherwise, all sects would agree on what is moral.

Quote:So I guess what im getting at can we have morality within modern secular society?

We do.

Quote:Or is religion the only real way to keep us all in line?

If this were true, prisons should be packed with atheists and there shouldn't be any believers locked up. We find it's quite the opposite.

Quote:And from an atheist viewpoint, can anything really be considered as immoral?

This is a silly question I have often encountered in debates with believers. Yes, I can consider things to be immoral withouit having an invisible man in the sky tell me so.

Quote:Even if we see man made laws, most of it seems to derive from religion, do not kill, do not steal etc.

Do you really think people thought it was okay to kill and steal before religion came along? I'm sure the most primitive societies frowned upon such things.