Evil Atheists

[The Grand Nudger]

I would argue that a common belief in a transcendent lawgiver gives a common basis for discussion and agreement, at least a starting point to develop morality, where do you start if the individual does not recognise any lawgiver but themselves?

The "common belief" in such matters hasn't helped Christians and Muslims see eye to eye has it. It's apparently not impossible to develop morality without god in any case, because unless you have evidence for god, that's exactly what we seem to have done.

[Darwinian]

I would tell him his actions are wrong because they are immoral. They go right against the behavior needed to ensure a happy and well balanced society. Altruism is an evolutionary trait that has developed to help us get on and function in groups, to help each other and to care for each other.

However, he would with me, just as he would with you, tell me to get stuffed.

[The Grand Nudger]

However, he would with me, just as he would with you, tell me to get stuffed.

Which is why we keep bricks on hand, you never know when you're going to have to hit someone over the head.

@ Crux.
Oh, so you think christians came up with the whole "thou shalt not kill" bit? Shouldn't be any evidence of such a moral code before the advent of judeo-christainity then should there. Borrower.

[StatCrux]

Man does not need a sky wizard or an arcane tome of fairytales to see in general the theme of right action. I would say that it would be disingenuous to attempt to tell your friend he was doing wrong by means of any religious tool, as it would be substituting one set of wrongs for another.

I keep getting similar responses, asserting that we don't need a "sky wizrd" but not offering any basis for a common morality..and still no response to the original question..

[Darwinian]

What did I do then? Give you a recipe for chocolate biscuits?

[frankiej]

I keep getting similar responses, asserting that we don't need a "sky wizrd" but not offering any basis for a common morality..and still no response to the original question..

You obviously don't see what everyone is telling you. There is no way to say it in an "atheistic worldview"... It is wrong either way. Morality is the same for most people...

[The Grand Nudger]

Look, Crux, you assume that our very humanity isn't the source of our morality, that without a god to hand us the rules we'd just shuffle about like animals raping and beating and killing each other indiscriminately. This is simply not the case. Our ever developing concepts of morality predate your fairy tale by an unbelievably wide margin. Societies cannot be built, or survive with a concept of morality that allows the unrestricted predation of it's members, by it's members. Any such society would not survive to pass it's concepts of morality on through the ages. Simply put, if you eat your children no one lives to tell the tale.

[StatCrux]

I would tell him his actions are wrong because they are immoral. They go right against the behavior needed to ensure a happy and well balanced society. Altruism is an evolutionary trait that has developed to help us get on and function in groups, to help each other and to care for each other.

However, he would with me, just as he would with you, tell me to get stuffed.

The difference is I would argue that he is morally obliged to change his behavior, regardless of his subjective opinion. As an atheist you can only stand on a par, his morality is just as valid as yours, so he could with justification tell you to get stuffed. Its interesting that there is inter faith dialogue at present and common ground for agreement between faiths, with atheism there is no such common ground. Rather than offering any solutions atheism is a catalyst for more conflict and disagreement as evidenced by the agressive behavior seen in many of its adherants.

[The Grand Nudger]

Because atheism is not a position that has anything to say about human concepts or standards of morality Crux. I also have to mention that I don't feel that any concept of morality that is anchored within the god of scripture is a solution. Just because you offer something up doesn't mean it solves anyones problems, and if we take a look at just our recent history I think it's pretty easy to make the case that such concepts of morality are actually a problem. You can only argue that such a thing is a positive improvement by ignoring any and every instance in which it has been leveraged to commit atrocity. Before you even ask what my basis for something being an atrocity may be, I think we can all agree that piles of diapers and tiny bones littering every part of the mountainside of some backwater country and the events that led to this being the case need no further explanation (just for one example).

I have to ask you this Crux, have you ever been face to face with someone who believes that he has a cosmic mandate to enforce his creators whims and the weapons and numbers to do so? I don't think you'd find the notion of "divine authority" as pleasant as you do now. What argument against his beliefs could you possibly come up with that would not also apply to your own?

[LastPoet]

It has been answered, it can be demonstrated that if everyone behaves the way you presented in the OP, society ceases to work, entering in decline. We have this thing called History...

Its as if the religious morality has a good track record preventing people from doing bad horrible things.