• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

The atheist and morality

"Gentlemen, gentlemen, please, no fighting in the War Room."
 
Last edited:
Here is my philosophy on morality.
Morality exists because it is needed for human societies to function better. We have inherited tendencies to do what is right and it seems the basic framework of our mind is to be honest. If we rely on our inherited behaviors we would live in societies that resemble something between a bunch of chimpanzees and a tribe of primitive natives living in a remote location. We take this desire to do good and apply thought to it and we have a moral code (the rules we impose upon ourselves in dealing with others). As we get away from that primitive situation more morals are required since more interaction with others is required. Also what happens is laws are passed to try to punish or control those who act immorally (or for other reasons not related to morality). Laws do not cover the scope of behaviors that morals cover. In modern days laws are passed by politicians and we all know how moral they are. :)

Numerous societies have developed numerous moral systems. If the adopted moral code is bad for human societies then societies that adopt them deteriorate. If they adopt beneficial moral behaviors then they flourish.

We have various sources of moral advisors advising us to do what is right. Some are politicians and political activists (unfortunately), community leaders, religious leaders, parents, teachers, and philosophers, all promoting their moral viewpoint. Society slowly changes their moral codes in response to these pressures. None of these moral advisors really know what is good for human societies and they use some common sense, logic and religious principles/scriptures to come up with their ideas.
In addition individuals will give great thought about morality and talk among their peers and alter their behavior accordingly to these new personal beliefs. Individuals will also think about morality and end up behaving less moral than before.

There are forces motivating people to act immorally and morally at the same time. Sometimes they may act immorally such as a husband may believe it is immoral to cheat on his wife and yet be tempted to do so and may actually do so. This does not mean that he was a moral person and suddenly is immoral. It means he was acting morally and then committed an immoral act. Having done so he may rationalize it so that he can think he was right in doing so yet underneath it he still feels it is immoral. His neighbor may feel it is morally acceptable to cheat on his wife. He may feel that his relationship can handle it and cheating makes him happy so keeps him married to his wife. Who is right? From my perspective both may be right. For the one person cheating may be bad and the other it may be good. Personally I think lying is bad especially to people you are intimate with however some people prefer lies in intimacy rather that the truth for some odd reason. I guess they prefer to maintain their illusion of the relationship rather than dealing with the truth of it. Anyway without details like that I could not really decide on the morality of those individuals.
Not much science there but then there isn't much science about it. Still it is good for people to talk about issues or morality as it brings out the best in (some) people.
 
SirPhilip, you’ve managed to construct a post that could really be considered quite offensive to a whole multitude of different people. I hope this was written with your tongue in your cheek, but it’s kind of hard to tell with no :)s or anything to indicate a joking tone.

Especially your PPS statement, since every one of the ladies that frequent this forum would likely consider herself an atheist/rational thinker/intellectual. The supposed wrath of God I’d certainly challenge, but the wrath of an upset lady I can assure you is quite real. :boxedin:
 
Silly Humans..

My wife doesn't consciously try to avoid saying "god" during sex, she just doesn't.
Click to expand...
Has she seen a shrink (no pun intended) about this? And what the sam hill are you shoving up her butt, anyway? Surely it can't be more than five inches.

It never enters her mind.
Click to expand...
This violates Holmes law, which states a woman's state of vicarious helplessness is inversely proportional to the size of the object rammed up her butt. It's true. :)

There are people that absolutely don't believe in gods and never invoke them at ANY time. Those people are called atheists. Now, stfu, you tard.
Click to expand...
Surely I'm on the fast track to recognition as a Bright, what with my hard-hitting (sic) examination of your wife.

Your entire premise seems to be one of "everyone believes in a god, whether they admit it or not." It's insulting, wrong and just plain stupid.
Click to expand...
Along with the $1,000,000 she'd receive for proving perpetual motion along with disproving Holmes Law in bed with you under controlled conditions she'd also be elligable for a cool $10 from me for videotaping you stubbing your toe and instinctively calling for Him to punish it for not doing anything.

Stop the personal attacks. This is not appropriate at all.
Replying to this modbox in thread will be off topic  Posted By: Lisa Simpson
 
Last edited by a moderator:
SirPhilip, you’ve managed to construct a post that could really be considered quite offensive to a whole multitude of different people. I hope this was written with your tongue in your cheek, but it’s kind of hard to tell with no :)s or anything to indicate a joking tone.
Click to expand...
I'm very offended that you take such a serious issue as this - and my efforts to get to the bottom of it - as a joke.
 
Especially your PPS statement, since every one of the ladies that frequent this forum would likely consider herself an atheist/rational thinker/intellectual. The supposed wrath of God I’d certainly challenge, but the wrath of an upset lady I can assure you is quite real.
Click to expand...
Assuming they aren't over 35, don't wear thick prescription glasses, have a low estrogen level, read literature, and wear bland, ultra-conservative clothes, they are welcome to change my mind, if they'd like. :) (Oh man, I might get it for that one..)
 
SirPhilip said:
Assuming they aren't over 35, don't wear thick prescription glasses, have a low estrogen level, read literature, and wear bland, ultra-conservative clothes, they are welcome to change my mind, if they'd like. :) (Oh man, I might get it for that one..)
Click to expand...
Sounds like you and Amy Wilson ought to get a room.
 
Jeff Corey said:
Sounds like you and Amy Wilson ought to get a room.
Click to expand...
Ok, but if we end up having fundamentalist offspring with a typing speed in excess of 130 wpm, I don't want to be held accountable if they take a liking to this board. :)
 
thaiboxerken said:
No, it's not. There really are people that don't believe in gods.
Click to expand...
What about gods that believe in the potential of people that don't believe in gods? ($000,000,001 for anyone who can say that 10 times fast) Surely that's a charming treatise. Even Bart's sister would be be pleased.
 
Yes, they simply don't believe in any gods and live their lives not pondering the question. Many of them call themselves agnostic.
 
thaiboxerken said:
Yes, they simply don't believe in any gods and live their lives not pondering the question. Many of them call themselves agnostic.
Click to expand...
I would be called an atheist by some yet I am not sure there is no god (I think it likely there is no god). I rarely ponder the question anymore because as far as I can go with it leads me to believe that I lack the data to positively answer the question so I await more data or not (so far not). I usually call myself an agnostic but the results of a test I took on this board says I am a weak atheist, weak agnostic FWIW. I haven't met anyone who called themselves an atheist and wasn't sure there was no god.
 
Dogdoctor, how can you possibly have spent this much time discussing atheism without ever having been exposed to the distinction between weak atheism and strong atheism? Strong atheists believe there definitely are no gods, weak atheists believe there probably are no gods. Agnostic has been used to describe a number of different positions, and will remain an ambiguous term no matter what any one person attempts to define it as.
 
There are lots of weak atheists. They are possibly the majority. If you haven't met them then you haven't been exposed to very many different kinds of people, or you at least haven't discussed religion with them.

I'm definitely a weak atheist. I wouldn't say there are definitely no gods. But any particular major religion you care to name I would probably find their official conception of God ridiculous, and not much more worthy of consideration than the Tooth Fairy. You could construct a blander, more philisophical God, but I just find the concept unlikely and unsupported, not impossible.
 
Errata said:
Dogdoctor, how can you possibly have spent this much time discussing atheism without ever having been exposed to the distinction between weak atheism and strong atheism? Strong atheists believe there definitely are no gods, weak atheists believe there probably are no gods. Agnostic has been used to describe a number of different positions, and will remain an ambiguous term no matter what any one person attempts to define it as.
Click to expand...
Isn't it obvious that I have been exposed to weak atheism and strong atheism definitions? I am just not used to those definitions since I haven't conversed with atheists much. Perhaps I need to meet more atheists in person. They have little value to me as descriptive terms. It matters little to me if someone believes in god or not. But it does matter what other beliefs they have.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom