And Nothing Heard My Scream

Sure. We all want to have a stable society.

The question is, what does it take to GUARANTEE that society is stable.

Well, there's law enforcement, for one. It's not rational to go on a killing spree if it ends in a lethal injection.

There's society's pressure, which sort of takes the form of the social contract that Locke talked about, as well as Rousseau (the philosophers, not the characters from Lost). Basically, it boils down to the fact that sociopaths usually don't make many friends. Take a look at the lives of serial killers. In order to function well within society, the vast majority of people follow its rules.

There's also personal guilt. I don't believe that if I killed someone, he'd come back from the dead to stab me in the back. It doesn't matter- I know that if I killed someone, I wouldn't be able to live with myself. That's not a rational choice.

More important than this is that you state that belief in immortal souls is the only reason to connect with other humans. You say this is because it is fear of revenge that causes us to empathize with other humans. This is a ridiculous notion- have you ever considered that emotions besides fear exist? What about love, as an easy example? People don't marry the person they love and raise a family because they fear what will happen if they don't. They do so because they love the person they're with, as well as their children.

The idea that emotions have no place in rational thought is wrong. It is rational to do what makes you feel the best. For 99% of humans, as many others on this thread have noted, this is a moral and empathetic life.
 
In the sociopath-killing-everyone scenario, it's that one can never be absolutely sure that one will not get caught, even if it's a dark foggy night. And I can't speak for everyone else here, but when I do something good for someone, I get an instant reward. I feel really happy for about half an hour afterwards. I was able to do something for someone else, and some chemical reaction or other kicks off inside me that makes me feel really, really good. Likewise, when I do something bad, I know it. I feel crappy for about a week. I don't believe I have a soul, but I can guess how awful I'd feel after I murdered someone, so it is therefore rational for me not to murder anyone.

To expand on this thought, it's not even worrying about getting caught, or feeling bad for murder. Two people working together can accomplish more than two people working individually. There's advantage to be had in cooperation, and this is the basis of society. Working together allows people to specialize in tasks, instead of having to do everything themselves. Even in primative cultures, having just one friend or partner means you have someone who can watch your back for you.

The story in th OP ignores pretty much everything, and narrows the entire worldview down to the point of irrationality. It simply makes no sense.
 
To expand on this thought, it's not even worrying about getting caught, or feeling bad for murder. Two people working together can accomplish more than two people working individually. There's advantage to be had in cooperation, and this is the basis of society. Working together allows people to specialize in tasks, instead of having to do everything themselves.
Whatsoever therefore is consequent to a time or war where every man is enemy to every man, the same is consequent to the time wherein men live without other security than what their own strength and their own invention shall furnish them withal. In such condition there is no place for industry, because the fruit thereof is uncertain, and consequently no culture of the earth, no navigation nor use of the commodities that may be imported by sea, no commodious building, no instruments of moving and removing such things as require much force, no knowledge of the face of the earth; no account of time, no arts, no letters, no society, and, which is worst of all, continual fear and danger of violent death, and the life of man solitary, poor, nasty, brutish, and short.

(Hobbes, Leviathan)
 
Jeff, would you mind taking a look at post #63?

You haven't addressed any of the points I raised there, and if left unaddressed, I'd suggest that your whole argument falls upon them.

Take this point from that post, for instance:
There are a lot of people who wouldn't find joy in killing someone else. And you've given (neither in this thread nor the other) no reason why they should be happy about killing other people.
Let me make this explicit. Our brains are wired a certain way. How this wiring comes about isn't important here. What is important is that because of the way our brains work, we want certain things.
That's it. You can't call those desires (like the desire for happiness, or the desire to be a good person) rational or irrational.
They're just what we want.

To say that the only thing that matters to anyone is their own happiness is not only wrong, but demonstrably so. And because your entire argument is built on that assumption, it falls on it as well.

(If you're going to respond to this, please go back and respond to post #63. Thanks. :)
 
Jeff,

Why do the countries that have very large percentages of atheists and agnostics not have huge numbers of Michael's? Here's just a few numbers:

Sweden: between 46-85%
Vietnam: 81%
Denmark: 43-80%
Norway:31-72%
Japan:64-65%

(source: http://www.adherents.com/largecom/com_atheist.html)
Even in the U.S. we have between 3 and 9% of the population atheist/agnostic. This is a minimum of 8.7 million of our population. Why aren't more of them sociopathic? Here's a few reason's that I can come up with:

1. They're not thinking "rationally" as "Michael" did in your story.
2. They just don't have the opportunity because the rest of society won't let them. (But wait, I thought if enough people were atheists then society would disintegrate into a world of "Michaels".)
3. Atheists value life just as much (or more so) than theists and your argument is fallacious.
 
The Pearly Gates slammed open like a pair o' saloon doors. I moseyed on in, chewin' on a toothpick Eastwood-style and twitchin' my big striped tail, and squinted around. My right hand hovered over my six-shooter. On my left hand was what looked like a tartan skirt for a Barbie doll. I hadn't put it there, but I was gonna find who done that, and we were a-gonna have a reckoning.

My steely gaze searching the near-infinite ranks of souls around me, I cleared my throat and announced:

"I'm lookin' for the man who kilt my paw."

You sound like one mean critter Meffy. I sure hope you beleive in souls, and don't so all sociopathic on me in the after life.
 
I'm mean, yup yup. Thoroughly dangerous, more so than the average descendant of fluffy, stripedy woodland creatures. Uprooting trees, biting off mountaintops, leaving pawprint-shaped craters the size of ponds, all that stuff. Well... would you believe uprooting honeysuckle vines?

And I certainly believe in soles. Seen whole stacks of 'em in a shoe repair shop once, discarnate as it were. Someone told me they catch the darned things in the sea, but I can't bring myself to believe that without solid scientific evidence.
 
I think that Jeff Corkern's point is something like...
If there were no God, it would be necessary to invent him. Voltaire
One problem with an eternally persistent personality is that unless the great beyond is a wild, wild west scenario what could you do? Unless you could hunt down the dirty vermin that killed your paw it wouldn't matter.

The biggest problem with that idea though is that hate feeds on hate. It's a never ending cycle. The only way to break it is with forgiveness.

Gene
 
All right, I've had some time to think about this one.

First, this story is painfully infantile. I mean, geez, the main character wanders around popping people in the head because he feels like it. The reason I disciplined my children was because I did NOT want them acting like this when they were adults. There are rules by which we govern our societies, and the last thing we need is to glorify this selfish, cowardly behavior.

Second, I don't accept the idea that without the concept of perpetual punishment for the damnable that we'll have a degredation of society into the sort of utter filth in which the lead character wallows. Decency is inculcated by parents, and it's reinforced by good people within a community, in general. It happens whether or not we agree with the idea of God.

The story is ultimately slanderous. I don't buy it.
 
Jeff:
Granted that there are souls, and that they can exact retribution upon wrong-doers in a later existence, how can you tell in your current existence whether a seemingly horrendous crime is, in fact, a horrendous crime, or justice being applied for a soul's action in a previous life, such as writing very long sentences?
 
All right, I've had some time to think about this one.

First, this story is painfully infantile. I mean, geez, the main character wanders around popping people in the head because he feels like it. The reason I disciplined my children was because I did NOT want them acting like this when they were adults. There are rules by which we govern our societies, and the last thing we need is to glorify this selfish, cowardly behavior.

Second, I don't accept the idea that without the concept of perpetual punishment for the damnable that we'll have a degredation of society into the sort of utter filth in which the lead character wallows. Decency is inculcated by parents, and it's reinforced by good people within a community, in general. It happens whether or not we agree with the idea of God.

The story is ultimately slanderous. I don't buy it.


Agreed.

Look, my four year old has a better developed sense of common decency than the main character of that story. I'm growing tired of the entire, what's to stop you from killing and raping and stealing if you haven't got a god to tell you it's wrong and punish you argument, anyway. It's nonsense and offensive to anyone who isn't inclined toward the kind of psychotic acts of random violence depicted in the story.

By which I mean pretty much everyone.
 
So what does this loon have to gain from killing people? The story doesn't even mention stealing from them.

I can only guess that the woo in question would enjoy killing people. That is not a survival trait, so something in his brain must have short-circuited.
 
So what does this loon have to gain from killing people? The story doesn't even mention stealing from them.

I can only guess that the woo in question would enjoy killing people. That is not a survival trait, so something in his brain must have short-circuited.

The "short circuit" is the idea that without a God to demand retribution, this sort of thing would be the norm. It is not. And I find it damned insulting.
 
LotusMegami,
So what does this loon have to gain from killing people? The story doesn't even mention stealing from them.

The value gained: Three thousand, five hundred ninety-eight dollars.
The value lost: One forty-five, five shells.
The value of the humans killed: Zero.

Reward and punishment are common in society. Work hard and get a raise/promotion or see a cop and hit the brakes. Different people have different ideas of what is right or wrong. That puts the matter on the level of opinion. Homicidal bombers call it suicide.

A personality that persists after death isn't a solution to or (the lack of) the cause of the world's problems.

Gene
 
This attitude has come to deeply trouble me since I finally made the obvious leap and became an agnostic. Some people clearly believe that without the fear of punishment, everyone would do horrible, evil things. Is that more insulting to atheists and agnostics, or to themselves? Are they serious in saying that without the fear of God's judgment they would murder and rape and, I don't know, eat babies or whatever? Don't they see the utter moral bankruptcy of that?

It's horrifying to me that so many people believe they only co-exist peacefully with others because if they don't, God will smack them. To me it seems that if there's no final judgment, our immediate actions actually matter more than they would have otherwise, because they are essentially all there is. It's a bit like how spelling and grammar matter more on the internet, not less. I have a friend who tells me I've become an existentialist.

I hope some of that makes sense.:cool:
 
Hopper: It makes perfect sense.

The kind of dreck the OP posted is not only severely insulting to all of us who try to live decent, ethical lives without having to be bullied into it by imaginary cloud-dwellers, IMO it's also not very well thought out and doesn't represent the situation anything like honestly. Or maybe the distortions and misrepresentations were thought out carefully to achieve maximum impact on those who accept the OP's contentions without thinking anything through. I can't read minds and couldn't say which is so.

Whichever. The sad little squib speaks volumes about its author while having absolutely nothing to say about those it purports to target.

Backfire.
 
Here's my counter to the OP:

An Offer You Can't Refuse.

I was making a delivery stop in a small office park, when I noticed that to get backed into where I could get unloaded, I would need to swing the truck wide and left, then hook it back into the loading area. Problem was, someone had parked their car right where I needed to pull in. This was going to make things tough.

I asked around, located where I could find the owner, and walked across the street to another office building, one with white marble on the front, but lacking a name to indicate which business I was dealing with. I walked in, and mentioned to the receptionist I needed to see someone about moving a car.

There was a man standing behind her, who simply said, “Yes, we’ve been expecting you.”

“If you were expecting me, why didn’t you move the car in the first place?”

“Go up the stairs and down the hall to the office at the end.”

I shrugged, and headed up the stairs and down the hall, passing motivational posters that declared the advantages to be found in what the rest of us would call “Evil.” It was an odd place.

I got to the end of the hall, and was facing a dark heavy wooden door that read, “LUCIFER MEPHISTOPHELES, CEO.” I knocked, heard a pleasant “Come in,” and entered.

He was dressed in a dark blue suit, Italian, unless I missed my guess, and the room, while sparsely furnished for its size, was elegant, and quiet. He sat behind a dark mahogany desk, and was seated in a black leather chair. His dark hair was styled elegantly, and for the most part, he looked more like Tom Cruise than the Prince of Darkness.

“Welcome, welcome,” he said, extending a hand, which I ignored. “I have been expecting you.”

“If you were expecting me, why didn’t you park in a better spot?”

“Ah, but I had to get your attention.”

“You did. Now, about your car…”

“You are known, if I’m not mistaken, as ‘Roadtoad’?”

That stopped me for a moment. “Well, yes, but what does that have to do with the price of doughnuts in Modesto?”

Mr. Mephistopheles stood up, clapping his hands and rubbing them together. “I am prepared to make you an offer, sir, which I think you’ll find quite interesting.”

“Do tell.”

“I am willing to offer you unlimited wealth, power, and prestige. Whatever it is that you want, it shall be yours. Whatever you ask, it shall be. All that I request from you is your eternal soul.”

“I’ll pass.”

He paused, staring at me as though I were some sort of nut. “Perhaps I didn’t make myself clear.”

“No, you made yourself perfectly clear. I’m simply not interested.”

For a moment, he stood staring at me. “You do realize, don’t you, that by denying me, I can make your life a living hell?”

“Given where I worked in the past, and the fact I’ve been divorced. Been there, done that.”

He nodded. “Oh, yes, of course,” he sighed, “I should have realized.”

“Now, about the car…”

“I can offer you any kind you want.”

“Got a couple of them. Insurance is killing me as it is.”

“Ummm, yes. Perhaps you’d appreciate more money…”

“Ditto the income tax…”

“Right. Perhaps the possibilities of your heart’s desire…”

“How do you think I wound up divorced? Look, all this is interesting, but the reality is that I don’t have time for this kind of nonsense. I know what kind of a person I am, and what happens when I find myself getting my way any and all of the time. Sometimes, what I want is simply not good for me, and sometimes, it’s not good for the people I love and respect. I’m better off with only having that which I have earned.

“Power? My judgment hasn’t always been the best. I’d rather have Authority, where someone else can double check what I’m doing, and tell whether I’m getting it right, or perhaps tell me a better way to do it.”

“I can offer you that.”

“Can you deliver? I worked for a particular trucking firm that was big on promises, but short on follow-through. Thanks, but no thanks. To be honest, your track record sucks, Dude.”

“Do you have any idea who I am?” Mephistopheles asked.

“Sure. If the Bible is true, in the end, you’ll be stewing in your own juices for eternity in a lake of fire. Frankly, if I were to follow someone who’d be roasting alive forever in flaming liquid, I’d be a first rate boob, because if the head honcho were being cooked like that, it seems to me someone like me would be getting far worse.

“If the Bible isn’t true, you’re a first rate psychopath who’s convinced himself he’s the physical embodiment of human moral stupidity, which tells me you’re headed for a room with mattress wallpaper in the laughing academy, and your next fashion accessory will include sleeves that tie up in the back.

“In either case, what you’re offering me isn’t worth much. I can read the morning paper in any major city, and come face to face with evidence of just how worthless your offer is. I mean, Michael Milken may have money, power, and prestige, but the folks who invested their money with Drexel Burnham are still short on pocket change, and a hell of a lot more. Same thing goes for creeps like Ken Lay, Ivan Boesky, Bernie Ebbers… I mean, really, who needs that kind of baggage in their life? I already have enough.”

“So, you don’t want all the money you could ever want?”

“I’m still trying to manage what I have.”

“Power beyond your wildest imagination?”

“A 550 Cat and a RoadRanger 18 speed would be enough.”

“Your name on the lips of millions of women around the world…?”

“Over twenty years of marriage, and I’m happy with the one I’ve got.”

“Well, what do you want?”

“Some genius parked his Bentley in what’s clearly marked as a ‘No Parking’ zone. It needs to be moved, because my insurance won’t cover the body modifications a Class 8 rig will do to a car that’s parked where it shouldn’t be.”

Lucifer stiffened slightly. “You’re not impressed with me, are you?”

“Is that your Bentley?”

“Errr… Yes.”

“No.”

Lucifer nodded. “Would you be impressed if I told you I just saved a bunch of money by switching to Geico?”
 
To be honest, if some people have such a warped sense or morals and ethics that they need to believe in the delusion of an after-death punishment to keep them in line with society, then I say let them stay deluded.

If a man waves a gun in my face and says, "The only thing keeping me from killing you is the fact that these bullets contain cyanide gas and I'd breathe it in and die too," I'm more likely to reply "Well, then you better not shoot me" than I am to reply "Don't be absurd, bullets don't contain cyanide gas."
 
I think the problem with the author is that he's still stuck in the Pre-conventional stage of Kohlberg's Stages of Moral Development. From the article (emphasis mine):

Reasoners in the pre-conventional level judge the morality of an action by its direct consequences. The pre-conventional level consists of the first and second stages of moral development, and are purely concerned with the self (egocentric).

In stage one, individuals focus on the direct consequences that their actions will have for themselves. For example, an action is perceived as morally wrong if the person who commits it gets punished. In addition, there is no recognition that others' points of view are any different from one's own view. This stage may be viewed as a kind of authoritarianism.

Since the OP basically says that because there are no souls, there will be no punishment; therefore, the action is not morally wrong. Unfortunately, stage one is the most basic form of morality.

BlackCat
 

Back
Top Bottom