The nearness to God factor. How do Atheists feel about moving higher or lower?

[Cyberman]

Now you have to show your work. What makes you think that "God" is the highest existence? Oughtn't you to demonstrate its basic existence before you go running off like that?

I could indeed improve my personal rank: "every day, in every way, I'm getting better and better". Self-improvement is always encouraged. On its own it's not likely to get me very far in terms of societal interaction.

[truthBtold]

Well, God is The Highest existence, so you are getting closer to that. Improve your rank against what? Let's say yourself?

Seriously. . God is the highest existence? Where the hell do u get that from without even knowing what a god is?

[Rampant.A.I.]

Well I think it's innate knowledge. Good actions improve your rank while bad actions bring your rank down. We have pride in good actions because they contribute to a higher identity.

Ad populum, even though all people don't attribute it to God. Children raised secularly still have the same socially accepted morals (or better) than children raised to never grow up, and believe there is always an adult looking over their shoulder who will punish them if they do wrong.

That's not morality, it's fear of being punished. Who decides the ranking system?

This is something most humans believe.

That there is a score-keeping card for morality?

Have you considered if these ranks of higher and lower exist and God exists, that we can easily have a sense of them that makes us know it's true? And doesn't it seem like we do just like we have a moral sense?

We still seem to be talking about completely arbitrary rankings judged by the individual. People perceive others differently. There are those who would rate Fred Phelps as "highly moral," and those who would rate him as an amoral asshole. Where is this universal objective ranking scale?

[Neo-Scholastic]

My guess is that those who ground their morality in our genetic heritage would, if they were consistent, strive for greater conformity to evolutionary impulses. Otherwise they would evoke the very transcendent principles they deny.

[Cyberman]

I think you'll find it's less about our genetic heritage, except inasmuch as that makes us humans, than it is about being members of a (nominally-)civilised social species.

[RobbyPants]

Do you still feel there is stages of higher and lower if we take God out of the picture?

"Still"? I think your whole question is loaded. You have yet to demonstrate that people actually are moving higher or lower to anything.

If you don't make that assumption, the whole premise seems quite bizarre and nonsensical.

[Mystic]

Now you have to show your work. What makes you think that "God" is the highest existence? Oughtn't you to demonstrate its basic existence before you go running off like that?

It should rather be reversed. What makes me think the Highest existence is God. I acknowledge a Higher Power and a Ultimate High Being, then chose to worship it, and thus it becomes God to me. I don't believe in a being worthy of worship, then say it's the highest. It's the other way around.

I could indeed improve my personal rank: "every day, in every way, I'm getting better and better". Self-improvement is always encouraged. On its own it's not likely to get me very far in terms of societal interaction.

Again, we are talking about ranks. If you improve, do you believe you are a rank higher in existence then you were previously?

[quote='MysticKnight' pid='654612' dateline='1398102810']
Well, God is The Highest existence, so you are getting closer to that. Improve your rank against what? Let's say yourself?

Seriously. . God is the highest existence? Where the hell do u get that from without even knowing what a god is?

A god is simply a being worthy of worship. Worship is simply the highest type of reverence we humans have. I believe we all travel to the Highest existence, so would not worship a rank which I have potential of reaching. Since we all travel to Highest existence, there is only one rank that none will reach, which is Highest Being himself. That is why I believe only that being is worthy of worship, hence the only God, hence Allah.

It's not that I believe a being is worthy of worship then believe it's the highest. It's the other way around.

Ad populum, even though all people don't attribute it to God. Children raised secularly still have the same socially accepted morals (or better) than children raised to never grow up, and believe there is always an adult looking over their shoulder who will punish them if they do wrong.

This is a straw man.

That's not morality, it's fear of being punished. Who decides the ranking system?

That there is a score-keeping card for morality?

You bring a good point, in that, how do we have ranks or values of goodness and honour, if there is no score keeping system. What if we don't care about our deeds, does that make our deeds irrelevant? Or do we still inherit our actions, get a value for them, and have an objective rank? And if so how?

If we are valuing our actions by our subjective experience, we can chose to forget and not care about our deeds. Others might care and be harder on themselves. There is no objective score sheet however.

In the case of God however the value of each person is known to him and inherited in the soul. Good actions get inherited and bad actions get inherited.

Where is this universal objective ranking scale?

I would think it's god, and god lives within us, and we chose how much to be in tune with that commander and teacher in us, or we can ignore it's judgement.

[Ryantology]

My guess is that those who ground their morality in our genetic heritage would, if they were consistent, strive for greater conformity to evolutionary impulses. Otherwise they would evoke the very transcendent principles they deny.

Given that the tendency of life forms to evolve is, ultimately, a mechanism for survival and advancement, I'm willing to suggest that morality should, ideally, indeed serve that end.

[Cyberman]

It should rather be reversed. What makes me think the Highest existence is God. I acknowledge a Higher Power and a Ultimate High Being, then chose to worship it, and thus it becomes God to me. I don't believe in a being worthy of worship, then say it's the highest. It's the other way around.

So to sum up: you've found something which you consider to be vastly (infinitely?) more powerful than yourself, then chose to make it your god. Without wishing to appear judgemental, what part of that would you consider to be rational were it to come from someone else?

For some reason I can't help being reminded of the nuke-worshipping mutant humans from Beneath The Planet Of The Apes.

[Mystic]

It should rather be reversed. What makes me think the Highest existence is God. I acknowledge a Higher Power and a Ultimate High Being, then chose to worship it, and thus it becomes God to me. I don't believe in a being worthy of worship, then say it's the highest. It's the other way around.

So to sum up: you've found something which you consider to be vastly (infinitely?) more powerful than yourself, then chose to make it your god. Without wishing to appear judgemental, what part of that would you consider to be rational were it to come from someone else?

For some reason I can't help being reminded of the nuke-worshipping mutant humans from Beneath The Planet Of The Apes.

Well it's not simply power, it's that it's the ultimate existence, the highest being, the being that excels in all qualities of perfection and who highness cannot ever be reached by creation. It's the Highest in love and goodness as well as power. It's not simply power that I worship, although, in reality ultimate power is ultimate love/goodness.