Why be good?

[dyresand]

Good question.  Why not just be authentic and trust that your essential nature will allow you to find your way?  "Being good" has the feel of evaluating experience according to preset, external criteria and then doing your best to act accordingly. 

Hmmm.

Are you suggesting that your "essential nature" has been hardwired with a set of criteria for knowing right from wrong? Is this an internal thing at work in you? Would you call it "conscience"?

And if it feels good to behave according to preset, external criteria, how does that relate with the internal thing or conscience just mentioned?

Everyone and everything that is conscious is hardwired with empathy and a social empathy. We have empathy for our own good people who lack it well tend
not to be part of the social construct. But we are at some level empathetic to those around us enough or well since this is the internet we plainly do not give a fuck
about the person in general on the other end unless we have a social bonding with said person. 

[Jenny A]

Can atheists justify, according to atheist principles, why they believe it is "wrong" to pollute oceans, cut down rain forests, or hack into someone’s bank account and steal their life savings? If the stronger members of the human species engage in such behaviors in their pursuit of dominating the weaker members, and if there is no God and therefore no transcendent, prescriptive moral law given by God to guide us into knowing what is right and what is wrong, then on what grounds can atheists legitimately oppose such behaviors?

You really like strawmen don't you.  There is no such thing as atheist principles.  Atheism is not a philosophy.  It is a state of being in which a person does not believe in a god or gods.

Individual atheists myself included might have various reasons for why they believe theft and murder are wrong.  Some may also be environmentalists, but not all. 

I personally believe somethings are wrong and somethings are right out of a combination of gut instinct (evolution is at work there I'm sure), empathy for others (evolution again), social training, and reason.   If I were to state my operating rule when in doubt it would be this:  choose that course of action which you would have required if you were able to write the rules for humanity before your sex, race, nationality, abilities, etc. were known.

The justification is simple.  Morals are there to allow people to live together in the most mutually advantageous way possible.

Doing so would be intolerant and would have the net result of the atheist forcing his morality on others -- the very thing atheists object to in the first place.

First of all, once again not all atheists object to religious morality.  That generally isn't why atheists are atheists.  (hint it's that little matter of the complete lack of evidence for god).

So what is the justification for imposing my morality on others?  None, I don't and I can't.  But society can enforce it's morality and does so in the form of laws and social interactions.  In democracies those laws enacted based upon societies common sense of morality.  When one religious group attempts to take control of this process the results tend to be bad for society as a whole.  Secular morality is therefore preferable.

And, as it happens, I do object to strictures imposed by religious persons when the only justification for it is my god says so. Let me give you an example.  Thou shalt not kill is pretty much universally accepted as a good rule, advantageous to society as a whole. Thou shalt not eat pork is not.  Nor is thou shalt not take the name of the lord in vain or thou shalt have no other gods before me. My objections come in the form of political participation and/or appeal to the First Amendment.

[Ravenshire]

I see Randy is straw manning his way through another thread.

[dyresand]

I see Randy is straw manning his way through another thread.

It's the only offense theists can use when they are wrong. 

[Thumpalumpacus]

... still waiting for an answer ...

[Randy Carson]

Mod hat:


Randy, if you do not plan on participating further in the threads you started and/ or the discussions you have involved yourself in, please do not start new threads, or we will consider it spam.


Thank you.

As you may know (if you're American, that is), we just celebrated a three-day weekend in observance of Memorial Day. I hope you had a great time with friends and/or family.

On normal weekends and long weekends especially, many people have more time for recreational activities such as gardening, boating, cooking on the grill, and even posting in online forums. On Tuesdays, however, it's back to the old grind   which means less time for online discussions. That's how it is for me, anyhoo. I'm so sorry if you've missed me, but there it is.

I do have a question or two, however. At your "encouragement", I've read the rules a couple of times, but I don't recall seeing anything about the maximum number of threads that a forum member may start. Did I miss it? However, I do understand why you might be concerned if someone new threw 8, 10 or 12 threads at you all at once.

I've started four (4) And you locked one before we could even begin the discussion.

Still, I hate to be a burden to anyone....Is that a violation of a rule? If so, please accept my apologies and direct me to the appropriate rule so that I may review it in order to avoid future problems.

Additionally, I have commented occasionally in some other threads, but I did not realize there was a cap on the number of threads that forum members may participate in simultaneously. Again, if you could please direct me to the appropriate rule number, I will review it and comply immediately. WWJD and all that? 

Please accept my assurances that I will do my best to visit the forum often if not daily and to interact regularly with as many of the wonderful new acquaintances I've made since joining. Everyone has been so eager to comment in my threads, I'm having a hard time keeping up! I never expected to be such the center of attention...new kid in town and all that, I suppose.

And this goes for you especially, rex. The amount of time and personal attention you have paid to me is truly amazing. I don't know how I would have found my way so quickly without your constant oversight. Thank you so much for helping me to "find my way" in this community. 

Well, I have so much correspondence to catch up on, I really must run...I do hope you'll understand that some days may not allow me to chat with all of you as much as I may wish to do so.

Toodles. 

---

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?

Your question is "why be good".

I ask you this "why be bad"?

Because it's in your own self interest?

As an Atheist I don't have Satan influencing me to be bad.

If Satan were influencing you, how would you even know?

---

I find it interesting how many Christians believe that moral behavior is dependent on belief in god.   Not all religions, particularly the pagan religions around Judea, tied morality to religion.  Piety and sacrifice in return for supernatural favors, yes, morality not so much.  Early Judaism doesn't appear to be much different in this regard.  Most of the law of Moses is concerned with when and how to make sacrifices to god, how to eat in a way that doesn't offend god and so on.  Morality in the modern sense is addressed much if at all.  Nor were the pagan gods particularly moral themselves (not that Yahweh is a very moral god either). Yet the Greeks were great moral philosophers and the Romans had strong moral codes.  Buddhists also have a strong sense of morality, yet they do not believe in god.

It should be perfectly obvious that morality is a social construct, not necessarily a religious one.   It is a necessity for a working society.  Societies without morality fair badly.  So to do people who behave immorally, society sees to that.  And that just isn't just laws, it's how others will treat you socially if you misbehave.  Not surprisingly since we are social animals most people actually want to behave well most of the time.

Jenny-

If morality is purely a social construct, would you have a problem with a society that requires that widows be burned on their dead husband's funeral pyres like the Hindus required? Would you object to Muslim society in which little girls are subjected to genital mutilation?

These practices were/are agreed to by the majority if not unanimity of these cultures. Who are we to impose our values on them?

[Thumpalumpacus]

... still waiting for an answer  ...

Has time to shit-talk a moderator, but won't answer posts made an hour ago ...

[Randy Carson]

I believe I have morals, to be kind to other and that golden rule, I didn't get that from the bible. I was raised to treat people the way I would like to be treated. I help people when I can, sometimes I help too much, that could be considered bad by some. It is a pretty loaded question with too many directions to sum up, and it changes. I try to do no harm. That is as simple as it gets. Now, why? I don't want to do things that give me negative feelings, guilt, remorse, and anxiety. That is broken down to the most simple explanation. I don't need a book, but you can get all of the same moral stories from Grimm's fairy tales and My Little Pony. No god required.

Kitty-

Thank you. You were able to express your view without a single four-letter word...a rare gift in this forum, apparently, which suggests that you actually are trying to live as you wrote.

Now, I agree that you don't need a book (and I presume you mean the bible and not a copy of Miss Manners!) - after all, it took awhile for the "Book" to be written, and people knew right and wrong long before then.

The question is: How did we get this sense of right and wrong? Evolution doesn't suggest that males should be polite with females...it suggests that the strongest and most aggressive mate when and where they please. That's just "survival of the fittest", isn't it?

So, in light of that, WHY should men be good on their dates with women v. taking what they want simply because they can like our ancestors might have done a few thousand years ago?

[c172]

Your question is "why be good".

I ask you this "why be bad"?

Because it's in your own self interest?

Is it? I did not know that.

[rexbeccarox]

---

Mod hat:


Randy, if you do not plan on participating further in the threads you started and/ or the discussions you have involved yourself in, please do not start new threads, or we will consider it spam.


Thank you.

As you may know (if you're American, that is), we just celebrated a three-day weekend in observance of Memorial Day. I hope you had a great time with friends and/or family.

On normal weekends and long weekends especially, many people have more time for recreational activities such as gardening, boating, cooking on the grill, and even posting in online forums. On Tuesdays, however, it's back to the old grind   which means less time for online discussions. That's how it is for me, anyhoo. I'm so sorry if you've missed me, but there it is.

I do have a question or two, however. At your "encouragement", I've read the rules a couple of times, but I don't recall seeing anything about the maximum number of threads that a forum member may start. Did I miss it? However, I do understand why you might be concerned if someone new threw 8, 10 or 12 threads at you all at once.

I've started four (4) And you locked one before we could even begin the discussion.

Still, I hate to be a burden to anyone....Is that a violation of a rule? If so, please accept my apologies and direct me to the appropriate rule so that I may review it in order to avoid future problems.

Additionally, I have commented occasionally in some other threads, but I did not realize there was a cap on the number of threads that forum members may participate in simultaneously. Again, if you could please direct me to the appropriate rule number, I will review it and comply immediately. WWJD and all that? 

Please accept my assurances that I will do my best to visit the forum often if not daily and to interact regularly with as many of the wonderful new acquaintances I've made since joining. Everyone has been so eager to comment in my threads, I'm having a hard time keeping up! I never expected to be such the center of attention...new kid in town and all that, I suppose.

And this goes for you especially, rex. The amount of time and personal attention you have paid to me is truly amazing. I don't know how I would have found my way so quickly without your constant oversight. Thank you so much for helping me to "find my way" in this community. 

Well, I have so much correspondence to catch up on, I really must run...I do hope you'll understand that some days may not allow me to chat with all of you as much as I may wish to do so.

Toodles. 

---

Ew.  No Randy; I'm just doing my job.  I wonder why it's so damned difficult for you to understand why it's not acceptable for someone to start new threads while ignoring other threads they started on a discussion forum.  If you were contributing to the other threads you started, I wouldn't care if you did start twelve of them, you disingenuous twat.  During my time on staff, I have never seen anyone have so much trouble with this.