artwollipot: "Interesting that you think you know what atheists think and believe. Do you know many atheists? Have you talked to a lot of them to form this opinion?"
I am well aquainted with atheists. Most of them have been pseudo-intellectuals with bombastic egotism.
lmao Remember, people are people regardless of their inclinations.
I just blathered in another thread on some of this topic. I am a recovered Christian/Catholic/Baptist. I consider myself atheist (altho I wouldn't pass out if a creator revealed himself to us one day).
Ultimately, it makes sense to follow the rational thought. One cannot debate fuzzy, personal perspectives of morality. There are too many variables in play as to each man's interpretations, motivating factors, definitions. One CAN debate sensical decisions, and nonsensical decisions based on rationale and statistical outcomes.
So- to be atheist, you
can have positive actions based solely on rational thinking, or fuzzy emotional thinking, for that matter, based upon personal choice not ensconced in any particular otherwordly mandates. This can also be conversant, you can act to negative actions or fuzzy thinking.. Morals - well, perhaps that depends upon definition of good and of bad. [ I choose to operate mostly out of rationale. I would take my chances with someone who operates out of rationale, than someone who operates out of fuzzy thinking/feelings/blindness. (I being a recovering fuzzy person, speaking..)] I don't think an atheist can have 'morals' from a dogmatic religious standpoint. -This smacks of being an oxymoron. I do think atheists can, out of either operating upon rationale or fuzzy feelings (or both), operate under a guideline of positive and conducive actions.
In the end, it's all about personal choice.
Religions, what are they? They are umbrellas in which people operate out of mutually desired choices. The creators of religion did their creating out of wanting to meet or fulfill a personal desire, need, compulsion... They created to have a foundation met for needs/justification. The followers of religion, the ones who perpetuate it, do the same thing. They follow out of meeting or fulfilling a personal desire, need, compulsion, and one which provides a foundation for justification. So, ultimately, it still comes to individual choice, regardless if you walk in the rain with an umbrella over your head, or not.
The only difference I see with religion and atheism, is that religious people tend to duck under the umbrella to meet a need to justify or rationalize their behavior choices. Religion seems to tend to be a giant woobie blanket. Atheists just walk in the rain naked. Granted, atheists do so for a variety of reasons, and under a variety of premises, but they leave the god justification out of the mix.
I have made 'good' actions and 'evil' actions, as a staunch Christian. Why? The why is because ultimately I made my own choices. I chose to be a Christian. I chose to follow the laws of being a Christian. I chose to not always follow the laws of being a Christian. -I chose. I chose for various reasons to do, or not to do various things. Just like I do now as an atheist. The difference for me now is that I choose to stand and do what I decide to do - without an umbrella. I am quite certain I will continue to make decisions, like everyone does, like I did before.
Morals, in the strict sense, operate out of dogma. So, I would say the atheist cannot 'have' 'morals'. An atheist can make positive or negative choices.
To the original topic of how theists decide what principles to operate under, one would think whatever the givens are mandated by whatever diety they worship. Having been a Christian, ultimately, I would have to follow the commandments and whatever mandates came from Jesus himself. Period.
