RE: Atheist/Philosopher here.
October 2, 2010 at 12:21 am
(This post was last modified: October 2, 2010 at 12:22 am by fr0d0.)
#2
Moral behaviour would not be rational if there were no guarantee that it would be rewarded. If, as seems to be the case, sin often profits more than righteousness, then surely it is sinful rather than righteous behaviour that would be rational. Faced with a choice between doing that which is right and doing that which is wrong but which benefits us most, if there are no comebacks for immorality then it is rational for us to do that which is wrong but which benefits us most. It is only if there are comebacks for immorality, if justice will ultimately be done, that we have a reason to be moral.
Kant was born in, spent his whole life in, and died in Konigsberg in East Prussia.
Moral behaviour would not be rational if there were no guarantee that it would be rewarded. If, as seems to be the case, sin often profits more than righteousness, then surely it is sinful rather than righteous behaviour that would be rational. Faced with a choice between doing that which is right and doing that which is wrong but which benefits us most, if there are no comebacks for immorality then it is rational for us to do that which is wrong but which benefits us most. It is only if there are comebacks for immorality, if justice will ultimately be done, that we have a reason to be moral.
Kant was born in, spent his whole life in, and died in Konigsberg in East Prussia.
