What is the source for our morals?

[Longhorn]

Drugs.

Next question.

[bennyboy]

Drugs.

Next question.

The desire to get girls to trust you enough to let you have sex with them.  Morality is cheaper than roofies.

[robvalue]

It's interesting what you said about societies not being able to think outside their own accepted morality. I've always held that to be very true, and it's one of the reasons objective morality is nonsense. Every society uses itself as a yardstick.

I've said before, I think people generally go with the flow. They may think they would have developed exactly the same moral ideals in a different culture, but I reckon that's wishful thinking. It's one of the reasons I always try and think outside of societal norms for my own morality. I'm not saying I always succeed, but I try.

That's a good and useful exercise.
But I find it wise to stay anonymous in the practice.
Thought police are not yet very effective, but once outed, iconoclasts tend to be suppressed, often violently.

Yikes

I appreciate the warning. Hopefully this wouldn't apply to me, as I'm often just refraining from doing or supporting certain things that society says is "okay". Things that I can imagine future generations looking back on with horror that we ever did them. I'm not going around pushing my agenda on anyone though (not intentionally anyway, apologies if I've ever come off that way on the forum). It's more like I hope I can lead by example to some small degree. I have had some success in that department.

[Neo-Scholastic]

C'mon people. Let's see some real debate. Deontologicalists versus consequentialists! Utilitarians versus virtue ethics!

[Whateverist]

Morality is a classic example of how giving a name to something doesn't make it a thing. Otherwise how did the evolution tested balance of prosocial behaviors and self interest we actually exhibit ever lead some to seek an eternal, absolute formulation of oughts and naughts?

[Neo-Scholastic]

Morality is a classic example of how giving a name to something doesn't make it a thing.  Otherwise how did the evolution tested balance of prosocial behaviors and self interest we actually exhibit ever lead some to seek an eternal, absolute formulation of oughts and naughts?

Do you believe the same about Truth?

[The Grand Nudger]

@OP, could get them from a crackerjack box so long as they work, eh?

[Whateverist]

I believe truth is simply a characteristic of correct language use. Instances of language which correctly correlate to states of affairs that obtain (how you liking my pompous ass?) are said to be "true".

"Truth" incorrectly gets mixed up with notions of importance.

[The Valkyrie]

I've decided I'm going to start acting as though my morals comes only from the bible.

Roll on Christmas genocide. Though, according to the bible, I can't tell people about it afterward!

[Reforged]

Morality is a social construct that makes sure society can function. As a result we can trade, socialize and work together with a basic understanding of what is and isn't off limits.
That being said if atheists weren't required by law of the land not to, and I think I can speak for the whole community, we would all annex Poland then proceed to conquer the rest of the world in awesome black uniforms designed by Hugo Boss. A genocide here, a human rights violation there, perhaps a Charlie Chaplin mustache for comic effect? I mean, its obviously what Darwin would of wanted.
Thats just the natural progression of Atheism but for now its on hold till one of gets in power. Watch this space!