As a nonreligious person, where do you get your moral guidance?

[Ahriman]

All morality comes from religion. I base my morality on my knowledge and understanding of religion, even though I don't participate in religion myself.

I like that idea. But do you believe some religions are better than others when it comes to having a better moral system?

Of course. But what's important is that all religions have some form of morality.

[Gentle_Idiot]

I like that idea. But do you believe some religions are better than others when it comes to having a better moral system?

I think Ahriman is right here, though perhaps in an indirect way.

So for example MY morality didn't come from religion, because I've never been to church, and didn't start reading about religion until well into my 30s. Safe to say my morality was pretty much set by that time.

But history didn't start with my parents. If we're of European descent, the culture we live in was shaped, like it or not, by Christianity. We may have shed the religious justifications, but a lot of our morality is directly descended from religion. 

Many atheists reproduce a specifically Protestant view of society, how it should progress, what responsibilities we have, etc. 

Readable book on this topic: 

https://www.amazon.com/Dominion-Christia...626&sr=8-8

As for whether one religion's moral system is better than another's: that's a tricky question, because we are always judging "better" based on our own set of values. That other religion can just as easily judge us.

I still remember reading a scholar who spoke of Nietzsche's Ubermensch concept, that ultimately the only great way to judge morality is whether or not it is "life-affirming". Essentially, to Nietzsche, does your worldview allow you to live a life that strengthens both yourself as the individual and your community? If you are a rampaging murderer, you will kill and then get killed. But perhaps a rampaging murderer in a battlefield in which you fight for the preservation of your nation and its citizens is a noble thing.

[Gentle_Idiot]

I like that idea. But do you believe some religions are better than others when it comes to having a better moral system?

I think Ahriman is right here, though perhaps in an indirect way.

So for example MY morality didn't come from religion, because I've never been to church, and didn't start reading about religion until well into my 30s. Safe to say my morality was pretty much set by that time.

But history didn't start with my parents. If we're of European descent, the culture we live in was shaped, like it or not, by Christianity. We may have shed the religious justifications, but a lot of our morality is directly descended from religion. 

Many atheists reproduce a specifically Protestant view of society, how it should progress, what responsibilities we have, etc. 

Readable book on this topic: 

https://www.amazon.com/Dominion-Christia...626&sr=8-8

As for whether one religion's moral system is better than another's: that's a tricky question, because we are always judging "better" based on our own set of values. That other religion can just as easily judge us.

It breaks my heart to retype this. For some reason, this forum "ate" my typed post and I can't recover it. But here we go again.

I remember reading a scholar who spoke of Nietzsche's Ubermensch, and that ultimately, the best gauge of the greatness of a moral system is whether or not it is "life-affirming". Essentially, you want a moral system that promotes and strengthens the flourishing of the human race and allows it to evolve into a better ape.

I think that to a huge extent, all world religions aim for that life-affirming ideal.

[Angrboda]

in both cases the concept of right is ambiguous

Why do you always act like you've got a six-foot-long stick up your ass?

[Belacqua]

It breaks my heart to retype this. For some reason, this forum "ate" my typed post and I can't recover it. But here we go again.

I noticed there was some glitching going on. The "alerts" thing said I had a response from you and then it wasn't there. But it looks as if both your posts have ended up on the thread. Gremlins...

I remember reading a scholar who spoke of Nietzsche's Ubermensch, and that ultimately, the best gauge of the greatness of a moral system is whether or not it is "life-affirming". Essentially, you want a moral system that promotes and strengthens the flourishing of the human race and allows it to evolve into a better ape.

That certainly sounds good to me! Life-affirming and flourishing. 

Naturally the debates start when we define what exactly is the most life-affirming and the most flourishing. 

As I understand it, there's no real consensus over what Nietzsche thought his ubermensch would be like. In a sense it's something we can't define, since a real ubermensch will define himself (that's what it is to be uber) so we can't set out a program for him in advance. One hopes that he won't be selfish, though of course some people have interpreted it that way.

I've always thought that the God Nietzsche argues against is very much a Lutheran one. (His father and both grandfathers were Lutheran ministers.) Much of what he says about Christianity seems to me less accurate if applied to, say, Thomist Catholics. His idea that Christianity is opposed to human flourishing, for example, is true of some Christians but not others. Thomists of course have a different idea from Nietzsche of what that flourishing will consist of. But as mostly Aristotelian, human flourishing is fundamental to the way they conceive of ethics.

One potentially good thing about religion is that it gives us a more disciplined and thought-out conception of flourishing than a less structured, build-it-yourself version. If flourishing is simply increased consumerism, for example, I am skeptical that it's the best we can do. Traditionally religion offered a counter-argument against simple economic success as the goal of life. 

I think that to a huge extent, all world religions aim for that life-affirming ideal.

I suspect that's true with the possible exception of Buddhism, which seems to say that self-extinction is the goal. 

But as I say, how each religion defines "life-affirming" may be very different and perhaps incompatible with others.

[Fake Messiah]

Personally, I just read philosophy books and base my morality on them. They make more sense to me than the Bible.

How about you?

Bible, or any religion, does not give any moral guidance or morality. All that Bible does is say "don't do this because God does not want it", like "don't collect wood on Sabbath" or "don't eat shrimp", but it doesn't give any logical/ reasonable explanation as to why which is not morality but taboo.

Thus



So people usually learn about morality from other people in society which is based on compassion and understanding of consequences. Like in the movie "Borat", Borat asks some guy " Should we go to a mental institution and laugh at retarded people?" the guy tells him "no" and gives him an explanation that those people have families who are suffering and would suffer even more (compassion).

[Peebothuhlu]

Personally, I just read philosophy books and base my morality on them. They make more sense to me than the Bible.

How about you?

Before I do anything. I ask myself;

"Would an immoral person do that?"

And if the answer is "Yes", I do not do that thing. 

 

Not at work.

[The Valkyrie]

Personally, I just read philosophy books and base my morality on them. They make more sense to me than the Bible.

How about you?

Before I do anything. I ask myself;

"Would an immoral person do that?"

And if the answer is "Yes", I do not do that thing. 

 

Not at work.

Liberal!

[Gwaithmir]

I base my morality on reason, empathy for my fellow beings, and the principles of Secular Humanism. 

No you don't. No one does.

[Anomalocaris]

Personally, I just read philosophy books and base my morality on them. They make more sense to me than the Bible.

How about you?

Before I do anything. I ask myself;

"Would an immoral person do that?"

And if the answer is "Yes", I do not do that thing. 

 

Not at work.

A immoral person breathes and eats.