4 ms·

I would like to hear a clear articulation why a secular or atheist has good reason to believe there is a moral standard they should live by. I've never heard o

by yters 9y ago

I would like to hear a clear articulation why a secular or atheist has good reason to believe there is a moral standard they should live by. I've never heard of such a thing. Mostly it is just handwaving that "everyone knows it's good to be tolerant and kind." History would suggest otherwise.

AnIdiotOnTheNet 9y ago
Like most moral arguments then, religious or otherwise? Pretty much everyone starts with the conclusion they want and then engages the rationalization engine in their mind to work backwards. Religion doesn't offer any better a basis than anything else, otherwise we probably wouldn't have so many religious groups, often claiming to believe in the same God, fighting each other would we?
- yters 9y ago
  Most major religions have the same core moral beliefs, and similar justifications. They fight each other because they think the other religion is undermining the moral code.
n4r9 9y ago
I've found by experience - some of it very painful and transformative - that if I live according to certain moral standards then I'm more fulfilled and happy with myself. Call it a kind of long-term hedonistic justification, if you like.
- yters 9y ago
  How do you know that will work for anyone else? Why believe it is an objective moral order? On the other hand, if you do believe it is a moral objective order, how is that different than what religions teach?
  - n4r9 9y ago
    I don't believe in an objective moral order, or that such a thing can be meaningfully defined. Your question was whether there's a good reason why an atheist should live by a moral standard; I gave you mine. I don't expect, but do hope for, it to work for others; my experience is that other people are not so different to me.
    - yters 9y ago
      Right, and that sort of thing does not seem capable of maintaining a society's morality.
      - n4r9 9y ago
        I'd have to disagree; or at least counter that irreligion does not immorality breed. The least religious nations tend also to be the most peaceful, have the best treatment of women and children, and lowest rates of teen pregnancy, STDs etc...: https://pitweb.pitzer.edu/academics/wp-content/uploads/sites/38/2014/12/FAC-Zuckerman-Sociology-Compass.pdf https://pitweb.pitzer.edu/academics/wp-content/uploads/sites...
verylittlemeat 9y ago
The philosophy behind humanism seems like a decent place to start.
- yters 9y ago
  There is not much philosophy there. Just assertions for the Christian values of tolerance and valuing human agency, without any justification. But, there is no rational basis for such things in a Darwinian world red in tooth and nail.
  - verylittlemeat 9y ago
    There has been a lot of science coming out recently about how in an evolutionary context cooperation is more beneficial in some situations than any idea of individual survival of the fittest. Based on your reaction though with "red in tooth and nail[sic (claw)]" you seem more interested in your own preconceived biases than any good faith argument from science or otherwise.
    - yters 9y ago
      Yes, cooperation is beneficial to the group, but what is beneficial to me is for everyone else to cooperate and for me to take advantage of them. Why would an atheist ever do anything that benefits the group over themselves, if they can get away with it?
      - verylittlemeat 9y ago
        What's stopping you? In theory nothing but in practice many things. Atheists still have to live in the real world. The real world doesn't run on people fearing god it runs on, among other things, laws and reputation. Most people wont steal from you because they don't want to go to jail not because god is watching. Most people don't screw over every person they meet because then they'll get a reputation as a person to not work with. Say you decide to play the long game and "pretend" to be good until you get your chance to betray everyone for your payday. Some might say that's just good old fashioned capitalist business, a system atheists and the god fearing alike participate in.
mediumdeviation 9y ago
Consider the opposite - would Christians go out and start murdering people if they stopped believing in God? If tomorrow incontrovertible proof came out that the ten commandments and the Bible were in fact not the word of God, would my Christian friends suddenly start stealing from me or stick a knife in my back? As an atheist I find that absolutely appalling and I don't know how anyone can live like that.
- yters 9y ago
  You fail to distinguish between people habitually being good and why they should maintain those habits. Once habits are established, living the Christian manner is preferable. But, without a justification for doing so, the habits are not established, and they can be broken at a whim. This is the case with the "moral" atheists. They have grown up in a Christian culture and adopted the Christian moral habits. But, if it is ever in their favor to discard the moral habits, the atheist will do so. For instance, why give up your life for others? There is no justification for this in an atheist worldview, and without it, we would not have firefighters, police, or the military. Instead, we'd just have mercenaries that would just as soon massacre you instead of the enemy, if the enemy pays them more.

by yters 9y ago

AnIdiotOnTheNet 9y ago

Like most moral arguments then, religious or otherwise? Pretty much everyone starts with the conclusion they want and then engages the rationalization engine in their mind to work backwards. Religion doesn't offer any better a basis than anything else, otherwise we probably wouldn't have so many religious groups, often claiming to believe in the same God, fighting each other would we?

yters 9y ago
Most major religions have the same core moral beliefs, and similar justifications. They fight each other because they think the other religion is undermining the moral code.

n4r9 9y ago

I've found by experience - some of it very painful and transformative - that if I live according to certain moral standards then I'm more fulfilled and happy with myself. Call it a kind of long-term hedonistic justification, if you like.

yters 9y ago
How do you know that will work for anyone else? Why believe it is an objective moral order? On the other hand, if you do believe it is a moral objective order, how is that different than what religions teach?
- n4r9 9y ago
  I don't believe in an objective moral order, or that such a thing can be meaningfully defined. Your question was whether there's a good reason why an atheist should live by a moral standard; I gave you mine. I don't expect, but do hope for, it to work for others; my experience is that other people are not so different to me.
  - yters 9y ago
    Right, and that sort of thing does not seem capable of maintaining a society's morality.
    - n4r9 9y ago
      I'd have to disagree; or at least counter that irreligion does not immorality breed. The least religious nations tend also to be the most peaceful, have the best treatment of women and children, and lowest rates of teen pregnancy, STDs etc...: https://pitweb.pitzer.edu/academics/wp-content/uploads/sites/38/2014/12/FAC-Zuckerman-Sociology-Compass.pdf https://pitweb.pitzer.edu/academics/wp-content/uploads/sites...

verylittlemeat 9y ago

The philosophy behind humanism seems like a decent place to start.

yters 9y ago
There is not much philosophy there. Just assertions for the Christian values of tolerance and valuing human agency, without any justification. But, there is no rational basis for such things in a Darwinian world red in tooth and nail.
- verylittlemeat 9y ago
  There has been a lot of science coming out recently about how in an evolutionary context cooperation is more beneficial in some situations than any idea of individual survival of the fittest. Based on your reaction though with "red in tooth and nail[sic (claw)]" you seem more interested in your own preconceived biases than any good faith argument from science or otherwise.
  - yters 9y ago
    Yes, cooperation is beneficial to the group, but what is beneficial to me is for everyone else to cooperate and for me to take advantage of them. Why would an atheist ever do anything that benefits the group over themselves, if they can get away with it?
    - verylittlemeat 9y ago
      What's stopping you? In theory nothing but in practice many things. Atheists still have to live in the real world. The real world doesn't run on people fearing god it runs on, among other things, laws and reputation. Most people wont steal from you because they don't want to go to jail not because god is watching. Most people don't screw over every person they meet because then they'll get a reputation as a person to not work with. Say you decide to play the long game and "pretend" to be good until you get your chance to betray everyone for your payday. Some might say that's just good old fashioned capitalist business, a system atheists and the god fearing alike participate in.

mediumdeviation 9y ago

Consider the opposite - would Christians go out and start murdering people if they stopped believing in God? If tomorrow incontrovertible proof came out that the ten commandments and the Bible were in fact not the word of God, would my Christian friends suddenly start stealing from me or stick a knife in my back? As an atheist I find that absolutely appalling and I don't know how anyone can live like that.

yters 9y ago
You fail to distinguish between people habitually being good and why they should maintain those habits. Once habits are established, living the Christian manner is preferable. But, without a justification for doing so, the habits are not established, and they can be broken at a whim. This is the case with the "moral" atheists. They have grown up in a Christian culture and adopted the Christian moral habits. But, if it is ever in their favor to discard the moral habits, the atheist will do so. For instance, why give up your life for others? There is no justification for this in an atheist worldview, and without it, we would not have firefighters, police, or the military. Instead, we'd just have mercenaries that would just as soon massacre you instead of the enemy, if the enemy pays them more.