So if society asks you not to wreck the earth, you simultaneously believe that you have done all that society asks, and you don’t need to do what society asks? How does that work?
It seems to me that, evolutionarily speaking, since you will not reproduce and therefore not be producing any offspring that would be influenced by your particulary viewpoint, I think that your attitude would be selected against overall in natural selection. You die out and there is no one to carry on your attitude. Therefore, I would conclude that you would not make that much of an impact in the grand scheme of things.
And I don’t think we’re “headed” anywhere. I don’t know why there is so much debate on this lately, but what if life were just “unfolding” with no particular pre-determined purpose?
I don’t know why you feel having children is so integral to not wanting to trash the Earth. Do you feel no moral compulsion to not ruin things for the various many people on this Earth who aren’t your immediate progeny? Is ethics reserved for interactions with those with whom you share a blood connection?
I mean, you do, no doubt, have some standards of ethical behavior towards strangers; I assume you wouldn’t rob them, for example, or set fire to their houses or whatnot, even if you could get some gain out of it. Well, then, what is it which drives you to adopt those ethics but without further driving you to say “Hey, I better not ruin this planet for all the other people who live on it; that would be a dick move on my part, and they’d be right to be pissed at me over it”?
From an athiesm perspective children are really no different from other human beings other than the strength of the bond we feel for them. After all, who cares if your genes continue? It does nothing for you other than provide a sense of meaning, you’ll still be dead.
Which from an atheist perspective is a significant part of life - finding a sense of meaning from it, as it hasnt been provided for you. And one major way we seem to find meaning is to care about other people, including our descendants. Because we feel good when we do it.
People might argue they can feel good without doing that, but in practise that doesnt seem to be how it works out. People who dont, tend to end up feeling miserable, existentially alone, etc etc. Not immediately, but eventually Sure there are exceptions, or people who find meaning by caring about other things but we’re talking overall trends here.
Otara
I am an atheist. My morality is based on empathy and compassion. It hurts me when I hurt others or see them suffering. If I can, I will avoid that (except for spiders). It is still selfishness but it works.
Also, I want the human race to thrive. I see a lot of future potential in the human race as individuals and governments and hope that it will come about someday.
Despite our flaws, I like humans (and other mammals) in general. Why would I want to be a parasite to them?
The planet itself has been around for billions of years. I am in awe of it and that awe inspires respect. The same goes for the universe. I doubt humans can screw up the Earth itself too bad, but you never know. Why would I not care?
If you are only here for a moment, why not try to live as an example of your ideal: with grace, dignity, compassion, kindness and class? That is my thinking on it.
There is too much suffering in the World already. Why would I want to add to the misery given that I abhor it?
The social contract keeps everyone from killing each other (and worse). Sounds good to me.
Also, what Otara said. (:
Well said. I’m an atheist with children, and the last thing I want is for Boyo Jim and his ilk to be allowed to screw things up for them.
Actually, it’s exactly the same for theists: they still have to find meaning in things, it’s just that the thing they then choose to find meaning in are their beliefs and valuing what they believe to be the commands of a god.
Of course, this meaning often is “provided” in the sense that it is taught to many people before they are old enough to think about it… which is perhaps why many theologians are so oblivious to it when trying to argue that theism provides some sort of advantage on issues of morality and purpose over and above what everyone else has.
Morals are passed on by tradition. Traditions that pass on morals are called ‘religions’. The scorn you place on this idea is borne of an ignorance of history. No one is born moral, they are taught to be moral. The society you live in has moved past individual religions, but to speak with contempt of those who worked to pass on the morals that you now accept as being basic, is ignorance at its finest. It was tribal priests who carried on the morals and laws that brought us up out of the muck. There is no essential quality of your intellect or anything else that makes you a moral person. What makes you a moral person is the tradition that was passed on, whether you care about the organization that maintains it or not. Even if it was borne of Greek philosophers it was still literate priests who felt that this knowledge was important enough to maintain and pass on throughout the millenia.
Theism itself is not a religion, and therefore has no moral benefit, but religion’s entire purpose is to maintain moral cohesion amongst its adherents.
You are opposed to child rape, but not opposed to actions that can result in pain and suffering far worse than child rape?
This doesn’t seem to be consistent (which is ok, humans aren’t), but I think it points out that your OP probably does not really capture what is really going on inside your head. I think you would have to expand on your moral code regarding future generations for us to get a better picture of what you mean.
For example, are you saying that you care so little about future generations that you are willing to trade a mocha today for every human life born after you die? (I doubt it, but without the limits we don’t really know what you mean when you say it’s just an economic decision).
Kill yourself.
It seems strange to me that someone could take the stance that these short few decades on Earth represent the totality of a person’s existence, yet not feel that it is a duty to act in a way to ensure that everyone has the greatest opportunity to make the most of their tiny moment of eternity.
Hmm… well, I didn’t say otherwise. In fact I agree with the idea that people are taught to be moral (though clearly we are also often born with lots of natural capacities like empathy that make it possible).
Hmmm… well, good thing I didn’t speak with contempt to any such people. My criticism was of the belief that theisms provides some extra warrant or justification for morality.
Well, you’ve successfully demonstrated that you either didn’t really read my post very carefully, or that you read it while high (as you have said you sometimes do), or, and this is the one I’ll assume is the case, that you just made an honest error that I’m sure you’ll get right on correcting now that it’s been pointed out to you.
I’m a childfree atheist, and that’s pretty much my viewpoint. I know I’m angry enough about “air quality warnings” and heatwaves and trash on the side of the road, without adding to it and making things worse.
Why deliberately act in a way that you know is going to hurt others?
I’m glad you feel freedom . I am started to get a taste of it myself with the council of people both here and in the real world and more importantly me drawing nearer to God. I can only wish you the best in your endeavors in life although it doesn’t sound like you really have any planned . But also I pray you won’t change your mind about trashing the earth. Each person can make a difference good or bad. It’s a personal choice. Come to think of it , your still on the fence . Maybe you’ll see the work of the Lord some day and fall off that way. Either way , the best to you.
I believe the term you’re grasping for is ‘sociopath’.
Apos I am sorry I read too much into your post.
Me too. No matter what anyone does, short of a worldwide H bombing and maybe even then, the world will outlast me.
Except that morality has little or nothing to do with whether or not the world will outlast you.
Fair enough, clean slate, and sorry myself to be so petulant about it it.
To take another approach, Boyo Jim; what about appreciating the planet as something apart from human culture? There are myriad other species and aspects of this Earth that are amazingly intricate and worth appreciation, even if you don’t feel the need to contribute to human society. The worth of nature is amenable with atheism.(If you observe the natural course of all species activity on this planet, it doesn’t lend itself to a nicey-nice human type God, really, lots of confusing tooth and nail going on everyday)
But, there is plenty of beauty, or, if you don’t see that, at least activity, on this planet, that courses on regardless of what Homo sapiens does. Since you say in the OP that " I don’t believe the human race has any inherent right to be the predominant species.", you have some awareness of the issue of relationship of humans and the rest of the life on Earth.
So, why then feel that you can ignore all the other life on the planet, and cause it’s destruction by your reasoning? I suspect that your OP wanted to deal only with the human responsibilities, but, Trashing the Earth means a lot more than just not caring about human survival.