RE: What IS good, and how do we determine it?
June 17, 2015 at 7:44 pm
(This post was last modified: June 17, 2015 at 7:45 pm by Whateverist.)
(June 17, 2015 at 7:28 pm)Randy Carson Wrote:(June 15, 2015 at 7:03 pm)Catholic_Lady Wrote: This is kind of a spinoff of the WHY BE GOOD thread.![]()
The question I have for atheists, isn't "why by good." I think it's simplistic and deeply flawed to think that the only reason to "be good" is to avoid Hell. And of course, I believe that anyone can be a good person regardless of beliefs.
The question I have for atheists is how do we know what IS good?
Religious or not, we all somehow know that certain things are intrinsically, universally immoral. Let's use murder as an obvious example. So if murder is wrong, where did this law come from? If this is a universal truth, where did this truth come from and who/what determined it to be what it is?
Evolution is often suggested as the source for our morality, but I don't think this really works. The evolutionary explanation claims that as our species evolved, human beings who acted in moral ways (such as those who cooperated and did not kill or steal) lived longer than those who didn't. As a result, we now have the instinct to be moral that has developed over millions of years.
While evolution may explain why we act in a certain way, it doesn't explain why we should or shouldn't act in those ways. At best, moral truths which are products of evolution are not commandments which we are bound to obey but suggestions that assist our "herd" in it survival. But if our community decided to kill handicapped children after birth, if would be moral, since weeding out genetically inferior or defective individuals would improve the overall health of the herd.
For someone who accepts evolution and God, I don't see the problem. If all of 'creation' is holy, then the workings of evolution could be seen as a dynamic path to the 'good'. That there is the wide spread agreement that there is regarding what is and isn't good across cultures, would seem to support that position.
What you seem to object to is an inability to condemn a certain action by anyone ever as bad without the presupposition of a holy list of do's and don'ts. But I suspect you are far more concerned with condemnation than the god of the NT would be. Sure, you can no doubt cite scriptures to indicate the opposite. But the truth is, no one knows the mind of God. Those who want to give the impression that they do are like a gaggle of sycophants eager to curry favor.