The closest I can think of for any religion is that people in fairly stable and just societies tend to think of the world as being fairly orderly and just. And it is - for them. No doubt this would include some Christians, but I’m having a hard time seeing what precisely Der Trihs was getting at.
I know of no Christian who believes the world is just. None. There are many who believe that justice will eventually triumph at the end of the world, but none who say this world is just.
So, I see you making a clearly erroneous assertion that deprecates religious belief that is not even actually answering the question of the OP–which was pretty clearly intended to ask if any posters actually believed in a just world (to the extent that it was asked seriously, at all).
What Lemur866 mentioned; the claim that the scales get evened out in the afterlife. And the concept of karma, which mlees reminded me of.
Which amounts to a claim that the world is just. The sinners will be punished, the virtuous rewarded, and so on. You’re trying to claim that only certain kinds of claims that the world is just count.
Let me ask this, is there any reason to be good other than selfish reasons like it makes you feel good or you can maybe get people to treat you nicer?
If there is no justice to the world, if a person can make himself happy by murdering his neighbor and there is no chance of getting punished, should he murder his neighbor? If a person lives in Nazi Germany and only has six months left to live (no possibly of a war-crimes trial after the war) and he hates Jews, is there any reason he should not become a participant in the Holocaust? If it makes you happier, won’t shouldn’t you commit evil?
Here we go again.
The answer is, because evil behavior tends to make the world worse for everyone. And there’s plenty of justice in the world; it’s just not perfect, or imposed by anything but ourselves.
Why should a person care about everyone else if it hurts his own happiness?
Because people tend to be wired that way. And because groups of people who care about each other’s welfare survive better. Cooperation is a superior long run strategy to sociopathy.
Because, as a general rule, if you’re an insuffereable asshole, no one will like you, and they’ll make your life miserable because they hate you.
But if you’re nicer to people, other people tend to be nicer in return.
See, when someone tries to murder me, or torture my family, or rob from me, then I tend to try to fix their wagon in return.
And if someone muders my neighbor and tortures his family, I tend to get the idea that tomorrow I might be next. So to prevent that, I’ll round up my neighbors and we’ll go over and fix that guy’s wagon even before he harms me.
Of course, in ancient times this made life like the Icelandic Sagas…blood feuds, and so on. But we’re doing a bit better now, what with professional cops and judges and law-talking-guys and prisons and social workers rather than personal vengence.
That doesn’t mean that people don’t get away with robbery and murder and rape, since they clearly do. But habitual robbers and murderers TEND to end up either in jail or six feet under, they don’t tend to die of old age surrounded by tearful great-grandchildren. So do those robbers and murderers really tend to have happier lives than the nice people? I don’t think so, most career criminals are pretty miserable people who are criminals because they are fuckups. For every Tony Soprano crime boss who lives the good life, there are hundreds of fuckup career criminals who lead miserable, degrading lives.
So if you’re an intelligent sociopath, you can probably get away with all sorts of things. But most people, even criminals, aren’t sociopaths. And most people are of only average intelligence, in fact, 50% of Americans are of below average intelligence. So when these numbskulls set out on a life of crime, they tend to fuck up and end up fucking themselves over in all sorts of different ways. Not always, but that’s the way to bet.
Anyway, why do you imagine that murdering and torturing people would make you happy? Even if you could get away with it, why would it make you happy? OK, robbing banks would make you happy if you could get away with it, but most people don’t get away with it, and it’s a dangerous profession, and besides, most bank robbers make off with suprisingly little…a few thousand dollars, not the millions you see in movies. And so you have to keep on robbing banks, and eventually some security guard splashes your brains all over the ceiling.
That just takes being good back to a selfish reason such as getting people to treat you nicer or because you are afraid of punishment.
And we have to look at the example of Leopold II. He not only got away with being a murderer, he benefited from it. Or look at Kim Jong-il, he would probably be dead if he was a nicer guy.
And there are situations where doing the evil thing will benefit the individual. Think of the unwilling citizen in Nazi Germany or Iraqi that got the order to fire chemical weapons on the Kurds. What happens if they choose not to do evil?
Back to Leopold, perhaps you might be interested in King Leopold’s Ghost: A Story of Greed, Terror, and Heroism in Colonial Africa, by Adam Hochschild.
(Yes, I know this is a “drive-by”. I still thought I’d reccomend it to the OP)
Not everyone is wired that way.
And considering some of the things that have practiced in long surviving societies, is survival the criterion we should use to decide what to do? Did Leopold II’s actions help or hurt him? Did they help or hurt the Belgium society?
Actually you’re completely wrong here.
Christians think the world is fallen and wicked. They don’t think it’s just at all. God does not intervene because he gave man free will so man can be just or wicked as he chooses.
And because societies where people treat each other well are better for everyone.
And what’s wrong with being good out of self interest ? As a rule, being good is better for most people, most of the time. Does good not count unless it’s stupid ?
They get shot, most likely. On the other hand, that behavior was hardly beneficial to anyone involved, in the long run.
Not the only one, but it does answer the question of WHY people in general are not all sociopaths. Because the sociopaths tend to die young. Evolution in action.
Most people ARE wired for cooperation, because cooperation works better.
There is no WHY in evolution, only HOW unless you are claiming evolution is a process directed by an agent (or agents).
So it better to that person to get shot and end the only life the person has than commit an evil act?
Can you address these questions: Did Leopold II’s actions help or hurt him? Did they help or hurt the Belgium society?
Most people wired for cooperation with a small group. When you try to extend that cooperation things tend to get fucked up. How do you think slavery has survived so long?
Sociopaths tend to die young? What the hell are you talking about?
No, there’s plenty of “why” in evolution. You are confusing intelligence with causation; evolution is both caused by things, and is the cause of things. No intelligence required.
That’s a judgement call. And I was also speaking of what’s good for society.
I really don’t know; I was speaking of the larger issue you brought up of whether the world is just.
Stupidity. Slavery is typically bad for the group, if profitable for the few.
And it survives in backwards places, because it’s a bad idea.
They tend to be the sorts that rob stores, pick fights, get shot by the cops or tossed into prison. Go read Lemur866’s excellent post #29 above.
Well, if Christians make claims like that all the time Der Trihs, wouldn’t it be a more effective debate technique to go some where that one of them actually did make such a claim, and offer your polite and insightful refutation at that time and place?
Relevance, and all, you know?
Tris
not fast enough use edit to add obligatory on topic answer.
There is no justice in the world. Fairness isn’t justice, anyway. Evil runs rampant everywhere in this weary world, and doing good is only good, and wanting good is the only reason to do it.
Tris
This is what I lvoe about Der Trihs. He’s absolutely 100% against any and all first-cause type beliefs, all of which require essentially faith in a super/superior/superhuman/supernatural something, whether that be a God, moral order, or whatever./. Not only is he 100% against them, he knows, for a fact, that everyone who holds one is obviously a blind moron unable to grasop the reins of truth or some nonsense.
Except for his own personal opinions, which he repeatedly proclaims are based solely and completely on his own feelings. Not even upon actual logic, or even instinct. Just whatever he happens to feel is the absolute Holy Word of Der Trihs.