"Ultimate" meaning, "objective" morality, and "inherent" worth.

[Esquilax]

Too often, religious folks will assert that without their god you can have no objective meaning to life, nor absolute morals, that there's no value in anything not god-given. We've seen it more than a few times lately here, and it leads me to a simple pair of questions that I'd like anyone inclined to respecting that argument to answer:

1. Is there somewhere, in your opinion, where objective morals, meaning, what have you, can come from that isn't a god?

If the answer is yes, your argument is dead in the water. If you answer no, then replace "objective meaning" with "meaning from a god," because that's what you're actually talking about, and try the argument again: "You can't have meaning from a god, without god." It's circular.

2. How do you intend to demonstrate that objective meaning is necessary? Because without that, you have no argument for god at all.

[Brian37]

Too often, religious folks will assert that without their god you can have no objective meaning to life, nor absolute morals, that there's no value in anything not god-given. We've seen it more than a few times lately here, and it leads me to a simple pair of questions that I'd like anyone inclined to respecting that argument to answer:

1. Is there somewhere, in your opinion, where objective morals, meaning, what have you, can come from that isn't a god?

If the answer is yes, your argument is dead in the water. If you answer no, then replace "objective meaning" with "meaning from a god," because that's what you're actually talking about, and try the argument again: "You can't have meaning from a god, without god." It's circular.

2. How do you intend to demonstrate that objective meaning is necessary? Because without that, you have no argument for god at all.

I think Sagan's Pale Blue Dot speech depicts the nature of reality quite well. "All this" is meaningless long term. Unfortunately god believers of all religions fight over which religion is the patent holder of morality. The truth that they don't want to face is that "all this" including life, is finite. They can't accept that those who don't hold a god belief can value the time we have now. 

Evolution unfortunately works with force and cruelty, one example would be pregnancy through rape. But we also evolved with empathy and compassion which is why we react negatively to such things. What religion does to human thought unfortunately can and does lead to justifying harming others.

[Tonus]

Evolution unfortunately works with force and cruelty, one example would be pregnancy through rape. But we also evolved with empathy and compassion which is why we react negatively to such things.

I think that one thing we're learning is that we also have evolved with a very self-centric view of the world. Even as we find ways to fit in with various social groups due to our mental wiring, we nonetheless place an inordinate amount of value on our own place within those groups. We not only matter to ourselves, we're pretty sure we matter a lot to everyone else... but they're thinking the exact same about themselves.

In any case, it's not surprising that a species that has a wildly overblown sense of its own value would build a mythology around just that concept. A universe birthed by a being of overwhelming power and magnificence, who nonetheless is quite concerned about what is happening on some barely-discernible dot on the fringes of his peripheral vision. It's the equivalent of any of us suddenly taking a keen interest in the opinions (and breeding habits) of the Demodex that we happen to host.

[Brian37]

Evolution unfortunately works with force and cruelty, one example would be pregnancy through rape. But we also evolved with empathy and compassion which is why we react negatively to such things.

I think that one thing we're learning is that we also have evolved with a very self-centric view of the world.  Even as we find ways to fit in with various social groups due to our mental wiring, we nonetheless place an inordinate amount of value on our own place within those groups.  We not only matter to ourselves, we're pretty sure we matter a lot to everyone else... but they're thinking the exact same about themselves.

In any case, it's not surprising that a species that has a wildly overblown sense of its own value would build a mythology around just that concept.  A universe birthed by a being of overwhelming power and magnificence, who nonetheless is quite concerned about what is happening on some barely-discernible dot on the fringes of his peripheral vision.  It's the equivalent of any of us suddenly taking a keen interest in the opinions (and breeding habits) of the Demodex that we happen to host.

We wouldn't have evolved if we didn't have a sense of self value. But like you said, because our species started in scientific ignorance we had no way of understanding how flawed that perception was. Unfortunately most humans still stupidly value that superstitious sense of self importance where as evolutionary biology explains how our survival works. 

"Self importance" to the theist means their club is the center of the universe. "Self importance" as a scientific explanation in evolutionary terms does not claim life is important to the universe, it only explains our instincts to getting to the point of reproduction.

Humans have not had an entirety of existence at the start with what science knows now. Mentally our species is still a majority in an infantile antiquated view of reality. It made sense when humans didn't know any better, but we do now. That modern understanding of science based understanding, is still relatively young compared to a much longer history of scientific ignorance.

[Homeless Nutter]

Maybe pompous words like "ultimate", "objective" and "inherent" would mean something in the context of beliefs, if THERE WASN'T - LIKE - A THOUSAND MUTUALLY CONTRADICTING FAITHS, each with their own load of "ultimate", "objective" and "inherent" crap.

Problem is - religious people are generally fairly dim and they assume everyone else is, so they pretend like each religion exists in a separate universe somehow - and hope no one will call them out for it.

[robvalue]

Two different people can find two contradictory "objective morals" to be perfectly acceptable. So either there are no objective morals, or almost everyone is really bad at knowing what they are.

Also, objective morality would apply to God making him (in popular stories) the most immoral being of all. It also implies that there are rules set up that even he has no say in, about what is good and bad for his creation, before he's even decided what that creation is.

[ignoramus]

We have always said that the only reason why different versions of " objective" "anything" is even possible is because the concept can only exist in the recipients skull.
What happens in your head, stays in your head! No matter how much you wish it were real!
If that ever sinks in, you'll become an atheist like the rest of us.