A World With No 'higher' Moral Or Ethical Authority

[Priam]

*Originally posted by Euthanasiast *
<snipped to condense post>

Well-written , but too long considering the reply would be shorter than the post itself.

1. Your post is a response to Christianity, not all religions. Plenty of theists have religions which hold them quite accountable for their actions regardless of forgiveness, etc.

2. Not even all Christian denominations buy the automatic forgiveness thing. Catholicism, for example, believes that good acts are necessary as much as grace for salvation, acknowledgement and penance must be done to atone for one’s sins, plus several other quibbles.

3. So far as I’m aware, the concept isn’t that God forgives you all your sins. It is that God’s grace makes up the difference between what is your best as a flawed human and perfection. The proviso is that you are truly attempting to do your best as a flawed being. You can’t mug and murder a lady and expect entrance into Heaven because God forgives you. You must make efforts to mend your ways to the best of your ability at the time, even if it is insufficient to the crime you committed. Or at least thats the way it was explained to me. Its not a “Get Out of Sin Free” card.

[Largo62]

It seems to me the key word in the OP is “authority.” I don’t believe that any kind of authority, whether mundane or “higher” tends to make people any better at all. Societies which are extremely authoritarian (fascism, communism, nazism) may behave in truly heinous ways whether they appeal to a god as Italian fascists and Nazis did, or not, as communists did.

I don’t think ethics or morals come from any authority, but from the natural desire of human beings to live in harmony with their tribe. Individuals who have a stronger desire for personal supremacy than for harmony will behave unethically or immorally according to the mores of their tribe. Fear of a super authority clearly doesn’t stop them any more than fear of the civil or national authority does. That’s why in a country like the USA where the vast majority profess some kind of religion there are nevertheless more than two million people incarcerated for crimes. Higher moral or ethical authority hasn’t made a noticeable difference.

By the way, welcome to the boards, Euthanasiast. Even without additional hamster food, another thoughtful poster is always welcome!

[blowero]

*Originally posted by Laurie *
What would the world look like if NO culture or country believed in God, or gods or any higher moral or ethical authority than mankind?

Hmmm…let’s see - Instead of consulting a “rule book”, we would have to use our intellect to consider the consequences of our actions. We would need to consider the feelings, desires, and needs of our fellow human beings, and how our actions affect them. We would have no ready-made rationalization for any action we chose, but instead would have to seriously contemplate what we do.

I think it might look pretty good.

[Priam]

*Originally posted by Euthanasiast *
**What you are essentially asking, if I understood you correctly, is this: Is there a need for God to maintain order and morality?

The argument is that if there were no God, people would run amuck in the streets and laws would be meaningless; we need God for morality to exist. This argument is lost on all non-theists, as they tend to understand that a fundamental inherent moral base is mutually exclusive from religion or any God. Those who choose to believe in a diety are confused by this line of reasoning. Perhaps all that is needed is an understanding of what is meant when it is said that an absence of God makes you a BETTER person morally, not worse; the existence of God in your life creates a propensity for the corruption of your own morality. It does not combat it.

Consider for a moment the laws of Christianity apply, that you have sinned, and you have broken some code of virtue as defined by the doctrine of morality in Christianity. You are accountable to God to make ammends for your indescretion. Because you are a Christian, your sins have already been paid for, even before you commited them. You simply need to accept the Son of God as your savior and all of your sins are washed away in the eyes of God. This is a wonderful thing for those poor souls who are Christians and have a difficult time removing themselves from their basic collective human dispositions. One of the catchy little jingles Christians are so fond of throwing around is that, “Christians aren’t perfect, just forgiven.” If ever an excuse to overlook your casual indescretions in regard to sin, if only for a moment, existed–this is it.

Because the one that you are responsible to has already forgiven you, where are the feelings of remorse for having done
something you know to be wrong? Haven’t you at least dulled the blow of guilt? Where is the strong deterent for repeating this offense at your next moment of weakness? It is only when you take God from the equation, and wipe religion from the table that you realize that you are accountable to yourself. I would dare say that we are far more strict with ourselves than the Christian God of today.

God forgives the police officer who failed to run down the perpetrator and foil his escape, but you can be assured that the police officer will be absolutely brutal on himself for his failure to make the arrest. He may not ever forgive himself. The Christian woman who stole a dollar from the cash register where she works because she needed a Coke really bad is forgiven immediately in the eyes of God, yet if she has any morals about her she’s having at least a little trouble getting to sleep that night. The man who made a pass at his neighbor’s wife is hating himself for it, smacking himself upside the head for not being able to control himself, and wishing that he could take it all back, yet God acts as if it never happened. Is it any wonder, the effects that this has on society in time?

Another fantastic thing about being accountable to yourself is that you get to take full credit for everything that you have done in your life that pleases you. It was YOU that raised your children properly, made eagle on the sixth hole, beat your oldest son in a quick game of basketball, got the promotion you had been busting your ass to get, figured out what was wrong with your car stalled on the side of the road and fixed it without the aide of a repairman, a tow truck, or a simple smile from some sky pixie. If you can suspend your line of thinking when it comes to religion for just a moment and understand what is being said here, you will feel what so many atheists have felt when they finally dismissed God, self empowerment.

And once you experience this empowerment, you may find that going back to religion and God is akin to shackling your spirit to a rock. You have given up your freedoms. You have given up your choice. You have given in to your indescretions. You have turned in your morality card.

Morality with God? History has already proven that it doesn’t work. Morality with oneself? Happens all the time. After all, virtue is its own reward. Ask yourself how many criminals go to jail and find God. God is easy to find in a den of sinners, because he offers them the one thing that they cannot give themselves, fogiveness.

Think about that. **

[TVAA]

Welcome to the boards, Euthanatist.

[Urban_Ranger]

I think the following quote will make a good reply. It was a response to a Christian defending God-based morality.

“If it were proved to you that there is no God, which atrocity would you commit first, and why?”

[blowero]

*Originally posted by Laurie *
Would those with the most nuclear power dictate the lives and thoughts and laws of mankind?

Isn’t that already how it works? Since the United States is the country with the biggest nuclear arsenal, do you think God-belief makes us less likely to try to dictate to others how to live, or more likely?

Here’s a hint:

And there’s no doubt in my mind, when the United States acts abroad and home, we do so based upon values – particularly the value that we hold dear to our hearts, and that is, everybody ought to be free. I want to repeat what I said during my State of the Union to you. Liberty is not America’s gift to the world. What we believe strongly, and what we hold dear, is liberty is God’s gift to mankind. And we hold that value precious. And we believe it is true.

http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2003/02/20030209-1.html

[electric_sheep]

Let me point out one minor thing. For all the rules a system may specify, the most important one is always the same: You must follow the rules.

If you can get people to abide by this rule of rules, then your goal has been effectively accomplished, and it really doesn’t matter whether the whole affair is religious, cultural, political, or whatever it may be. Indeed, the psychological mechanisms used to produce obedience are pretty uniform, with variation only appearing in the particular regulations people invent.

[Iamthat]

Originally posted by Laurie
What would the world look like if NO culture or country believed in God, or gods or any higher moral or ethical authority than mankind?

In response to your question as it is currently worded……Not believing in the existence of god does not mean that a god does not exist. Nor does it mean that people do not know that a god exists, some might. So in your scenario there could be theists and/or others who know that god exists and therefore it would not affect them.

[Marley23]

So in your scenario there could be theists and/or others who know that god exists and therefore it would not affect them.

The question is about believing, not knowing. What Laurie certainly seems to be after is “what would the world be like if nobody believed in god,” not the difference between knowing and believing.

[MrO]

*Originally posted by Laurie *
If you can imagine a world where all people believe only in the moral and ethical imperatives of an individual or a government who have ‘sold’ their ideas to the masses - what would the world look like?

No need to imagine, just look out the window. Most people seem to swallow whatever the dominant culture feeds them.

Would those with the most nuclear power dictate the lives and thoughts and laws of mankind?

Sure, just like they do now.

**

Would those with the most power (economic and physical) tell us what work we should do and how we should live, and to whom we should pledge our fealty?**

Sure, just like they do now. As blowero suggested, the situation you lay out is not hypothetical; except for the part about no one believing in God, it’s real. Many individuals and cultures use belief in God to help sell their ideas, but they’re still selling their ideas.

*Originally posted by RickJay *
I see no evidence, none whatsoever, that belief in a higher power makes people behave better.

Same here. Religion has done some good things, but in my view, the bad far outweighs the good–especially since the good could be accomplished by people of good will without the superstition.

[Iamthat]

Origianlly posted by ** Marley23**

The question is about believing, not knowing. What Laurie certainly seems to be after is “what would the world be like if nobody believed in god,” not the difference between knowing and believing.

I think Laurie should have included, “And no one has any knowledge of a gods existence.”…in the OP question,

Also it doesn’t eliminate our lack of knowledge and the mysteries of this existence. As Kant has said there is an aspect of thought which is not reducible to thought, i.e. the act of “knowing” cannot be reduced to the status of an object of thought or an idea since it is that which produces the idea. In other words what it is that knows (and possibly what thinks) is unknown. It is affirmed that something exists even though that “something” is not that which is making the affirmation.

Belief in gods is not just based in fear, it’s derive and born from unexplainable events and mysteries of human perception and consciousness, and a curiosity to “know” and discover which is applied to all human endeavors.

Besides that, what does it actually mean to “not believe in god or any higher power”? What are the ramifications? Does it eliminate some aspects of human intelligence? Would we still have our capacity to wonder? What is “wondering” without believing in the possibility that some of those “wonderings” might be true?

If we can’t create without wondering, can we wonder without believing?

We would all be atheists in foxholes.

[Marley23]

Besides that, what does it actually mean to “not believe in god or any higher power”? What are the ramifications? Does it eliminate some aspects of human intelligence? Would we still have our capacity to wonder? What is “wondering” without believing in the possibility that some of those “wonderings” might be true?

What’s intelligent about deciding that your speculations are true? Faith is not a display of intelligence.

If we can’t create without wondering, can we wonder without believing?

I’d rather think so. Wondering is different from believing in that the latter involves coming to a conclusion. If you believe in something, I’m not sure what there is to wonder about. So at most I’d say there’s no connection.

We would all be atheists in foxholes.

I’m pretty sure you’re misapplying this cliche.

[The_Hamster_King]

*Originally posted by Laurie *
**Asked this on another BB - and would like to ask it here for the obvious reason of getting input from folks who claim to fighting ignorance with a higher IQ than most.

What would the world look like if NO culture or country believed in God, or gods or any higher moral or ethical authority than mankind?
**

You mean a world where people actually took personal responsibility for the consequences of their actions instead of being able to shift the blame off onto an invisible spirit?

Paradise … .

[blowero]

*Originally posted by Iamthat *
Besides that, what does it actually mean to “not believe in god or any higher power”? What are the ramifications? Does it eliminate some aspects of human intelligence?

I don’t see how.

Would we still have our capacity to wonder?

Of course. If anything, without the easy answer that “God did it”, the ability to wonder would be enhanced.

What is “wondering” without believing in the possibility that some of those “wonderings” might be true?

Wonder is “astonishment, admiration, or marvel”. To simply explain every astonishing phenomenon by saying “God did it” is a far more mundane way to look at it, IMO.

If we can’t create without wondering, can we wonder without believing?

Yes, it is possible to wonder without positing supernatural entities.

We would all be atheists in foxholes.

What Marley23 said.

[Shodan]

*Originally posted by Urban Ranger *
**I think the following quote will make a good reply. It was a response to a Christian defending God-based morality.

“If it were proved to you that there is no God, which atrocity would you commit first, and why?”
**

No offense, but this is more or less begging the question.

If you assume that there is no God or other transcendent entity on which to base a morality, referring to any act as an “atrocity” is meaningless.

Either you can make a rational defense of the value(s) on which you base a morality - human happiness, survival of the species, whatever - or you are choosing the value(s) arbitrarily. Unless you assume the validity of morality beforehand, you cannot establish that any act is immoral or otherwise.

If you prove there is no God, what difference does it make what I do, atrocity or not? Sooner or later we will both be dead, and nothing we do now will make any difference. Thus trying to label one set of actions as “moral” and another as an “atrocity” is a distinction without a difference.

Atheism necessarily implies nihilism. Or to assume the validity of some transcendant value on which you base a morality - which is close to what is called by theists “an act of faith”.

Thus a world with no higher moral or ethical authority is a world with no morality at all. Absent God, the word “morality” is a meaningless noise, no different from a sneeze or a burp.

Sorry.

Regards,
Shodan

[Guinastasia]

Not necessarily, Shodan. Maybe we wouldn’t want to commit an atrocity because, oh, I don’t know, we don’t want to cause someone else pain?

[Shodan]

But that assumes that causing someone pain is immoral. Until you establish that there is such a thing as morality or some valid moral standard, you can want or not want whatever you like - you still haven’t created any meaning for the term.

Regards,
Shodan

[Guinastasia]

Lemme ask you this, Shodan-do you like feeling pain? Why not?

Do you like it when your loved ones suffer pain? Why not?

[Eve]

*Originally posted by Shodan *
**Atheism necessarily implies nihilism. Thus a world with no higher moral or ethical authority is a world with no morality at all. Absent God, the word “morality” is a meaningless noise, no different from a sneeze or a burp. **

I guess it’s a good thing there is religion–otherwise Shodan would be picking us off, one by one, with a butcher’s knife!