Why be good?

[Thumpalumpacus]

I'd be willing to bet that morality is an emergent property of in-group/out-group dynamics, arising as it did because it help cement in-group cohesion so that a given group could compete successfully for resources. I don't know that to be the fact, but that would be my guess.

Again, so it's not really morality.  It's practical behavior we've misidentified.  The problem being when the practical behavior is no longer practical for someone, they no longer have a reason to participate in the behavior.

Simply because it's practically rooted doesn't mean it is not morality. I'd suggest you read the link that Cato took the time to post.

[Faith No More]

Death by gossip? That would make for a great tombstone.

[Thumpalumpacus]

This is fair. The key point I'm making is that Me > Not me for a vast majority of not me's.

Much of human life is about balancing selfishness and altruism. Both are innate human drives.

[Alex K]

I can't be arsed to go through nine pages, but I have to say this.  Every time someone asks, "Why be good without God?" I hear the person saying, "I only do good for a reward."

Hello. I'm a raving psychopath. I'd usually be busy killing everyone, but God stops me from doing so. Therefore, morality. Checkmate, atheists!

 

[henryp]

If there is no God, then there is no hell; and if there is no hell, then there are no ultimate, eternal repercussions, good or bad, for how we live out our mortal lives. Of course, atheists insist that people should be "good without God."

But why? If God does not exist, why be good?

Why does my cat preen my dog's fur? Why do army ants work together to build nests? Because life evolved to cooperate. Now while evolution in reality does not care if cruelty or compassion, cooperation or force win, our species like other mammals also evolved with empathy. 

Why do I behave? Because I have empathy and everyone is capable of that and you don't need an antiquated book or an invisible sky hero to know what empathy is. 

If you cannot figure out on your own without a cosmic security guard threatening you to behave I feel sorry for you. You also don't need to believe in Santa as an adult to be good.

The problem with religious morality is that the empathy gets limited to the tribe and is not universal and only designed to get attention for the head figure. Better morality is doing the right thing even without being told what to do. 

I like how you're a bit dick'ish to theists in literally the same sentence about how you behave because you're so empathetic.  

If I were guessing why people behave, it's because that's what we were taught, and we don't put too much more thought into it because we don't really need to.

[Simon Moon]

This is fair. The key point I'm making is that Me > Not me for a vast majority of not me's.

You seem to be ignoring our evolutionary past in your calculation. 

When our ancestors lived in small groups or 50-150 (most of our history), there was a bit more emphasis on altruism, reciprocity, kin selection. And every member knew everyone else.

A member of a group, while their own survival was paramount to them, they could not get away with treating the other members of the group as if they did not matter. If so, they risked being ejected from the group. Which would mean almost certain death. We are a social species after all.

Those evolutionary traits are part of our nature. They are driving force that causes us to be moral agents. 

[Cyberman]

If there is no God, then there is no hell; and if there is no hell, then there are no ultimate, eternal repercussions, good or bad, for how we live out our mortal lives.

There you go. See? That wasn't so hard.

[Randy Carson]

Define good and evil and then we can talk about it

You have a point.

Terms such as "good" and "evil" would be essentially meaningless in any absolute sense because, if God does not exist and there is no transcendent moral law revealed by God which prescribes how we should act, one cannot say that a given action is good or evil. It just is what it is.

One may not like or approve of a particular action, such as murder or theft, but it would be impossible to deem it "evil" in any sense beyond one’s own subjective, personal preferences.

---

Look, it's really simple: just because we don't subscribe to your particular mythology does not imply we lack empathy for fellow humans. That's stupid.

Yes, I agree. See my post #40 for that.

[Iroscato]

Define good and evil and then we can talk about it

You have a point.

Terms such as "good" and "evil" would be essentially meaningless in any absolute sense because, if God does not exist and there is no transcendent moral law revealed by God which prescribes how we should act, one cannot say that a given action is good or evil. It just is what it is.

One may not like or approve of a particular action, such as murder or theft, but it would be impossible to deem it "evil" in any sense beyond one’s own subjective, personal preferences.

---

Look, it's really simple: just because we don't subscribe to your particular mythology does not imply we lack empathy for fellow humans. That's stupid.

Yes, I agree. See my post #40 for that.

*Squints*
Are you...are you starting to figure it out? Holy crap, I think he's starting to figure it out!

[Jenny A]

Yes, Huggy, there are no people who've never committed at least slight moral infractions even gauged by their own subjective standards.  So?  What is this great difference?  

If you mean we are all doomed to hell fire for such infractions, I'd say your sense of proportion is absurdly, even immorally out of balance.  Civilized people recognize the difference between gossip and murder.

You do realize that there are deaths caused simply by gossip? In fact there is a TV series being made about this subject.

So has accidentally turning the wrong way on a one way street.   That doesn't make turning the wrong way on a one way street akin to murder.  Gossip might in extreme cases lead to suicide, but that doesn't make it akin to murder either.  If you consider all moral infractions of equal weight, I think there's something seriously askew in your moral compass.  I'm glad you are not in charge of writing the criminal code as the results would be horrific.