Political Forums  

Go Back   Defending The Truth Political Forum > Philosophy and Religion > Religion > Atheism


Thanks Tree43Thanks
Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old September 16th, 2015, 06:44 PM   #91
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Location: Oregon
Posts: 1,900
How do these morals compare with Christian morals?

Revere and greet your elders.
Console the poor and the afflicted with good works and words.
Follow not the madman who honor neither father nor mother; they are like animals, for they neither take nor hear advice.
Do not mock the old, the sick, the maimed, or one who has sinned.
Do not set a bad example, or speak indiscreetly, or interrupt the speech of another.
If you are asked something, reply soberly and without affection or flattery or prejudice to others.
Wherever you go, walk with a peaceful air, and do not make wry faces or improper gestures.
Athena is offline  
Old September 16th, 2015, 06:48 PM   #92
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Location: Oregon
Posts: 1,900
It appears no one commented on the possibility our morality has evolved, through our evolution of animals, so I am reposting this.

The book "The Science of Good and Evil" gives us a better understanding of our human nature than the Christian bible.
Quote:
From bestselling author Michael Shermer, an investigation of the evolution of morality that is "a paragon of popularized science and philosophy" The Sun (Baltimore)

A century and a half after Darwin first proposed an "evolutionary ethics," science has begun to tackle the roots of morality. Just as evolutionary biologists study why we are hungry (to motivate us to eat) or why sex is enjoyable (to motivate us to procreate), they are now searching for the very nature of humanity.

In The Science of Good and Evil, science historian Michael Shermer explores how humans evolved from social primates to moral primates; how and why morality motivates the human animal; and how the foundation of moral principles can be built upon empirical evidence.

Along the way he explains the implications of scientific findings for fate and free will, the existence of pure good and pure evil, and the development of early moral sentiments among the first humans. As he closes the divide between science and morality, Shermer draws on stories from the Yanamamö, infamously known as the "fierce people" of the tropical rain forest, to the Stanford studies on jailers' behavior in prisons. The Science of Good and Evil is ultimately a profound look at the moral animal, belief, and the scientific pursuit of truth.
Athena is offline  
Old September 16th, 2015, 06:49 PM   #93
RNG
Senior Member
 
RNG's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: Between everywhere
Posts: 31,065
Quote:
Originally Posted by Athena View Post
How much should we allow man to control our behaviors? If my daughter were to fall ill and lost her apartment because she could not work, I could not shelter her, because where I live no one can stay in my home for more than two weeks, without permission from a bureaucratic authority. If we believed God is a higher authority and that family falls under God's laws, than family could care for family, and personally I think that is pretty natural and important. This is not based on mythology, but on the nature of humans and how we survived for so long without canine teeth and claws.

I am once again in trouble on my job because I offered to do the wrong thing. I offered to do something that needs to be done, but it is not one of my duties. This is inappropriate and is perceived as a threat to the organization. Laugh, a friend said my wrong is being a redneck. A redneck being an independent person without sufficient respect for rules and who thinks of terms of what works, instead of in terms of obedience to authority.

From my point of view, we have a police state, and I would rather have liberty and an unknown God, than self-important men taking themselves too seriously, who can decide I should be evicted or fired, because I don't follow man's rules.
What I don't understand is that you seem to feel that you can't do those good things without there being a god saying you should. Why not just do them?
RNG is offline  
Old September 16th, 2015, 06:53 PM   #94
#freetommy
 
Sabcat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Location: Earth
Posts: 27,501
Quote:
Originally Posted by Athena View Post
How do these morals compare with Christian morals?

Revere and greet your elders.
Console the poor and the afflicted with good works and words.
Follow not the madman who honor neither father nor mother; they are like animals, for they neither take nor hear advice.
Do not mock the old, the sick, the maimed, or one who has sinned.
Do not set a bad example, or speak indiscreetly, or interrupt the speech of another.
If you are asked something, reply soberly and without affection or flattery or prejudice to others.
Wherever you go, walk with a peaceful air, and do not make wry faces or improper gestures.


Right on!
Sabcat is offline  
Old September 16th, 2015, 08:21 PM   #95
Senior Member
 
hot dragon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: australia
Posts: 9,417
Quote:
Originally Posted by Athena View Post
It appears no one commented on the possibility our morality has evolved, through our evolution of animals, so I am reposting this.

The book "The Science of Good and Evil" gives us a better understanding of our human nature than the Christian bible.
Quote:
From bestselling author Michael Shermer, an investigation of the evolution of morality that is "a paragon of popularized science and philosophy" The Sun (Baltimore)

A century and a half after Darwin first proposed an "evolutionary ethics," science has begun to tackle the roots of morality. Just as evolutionary biologists study why we are hungry (to motivate us to eat) or why sex is enjoyable (to motivate us to procreate), they are now searching for the very nature of humanity.

In The Science of Good and Evil, science historian Michael Shermer explores how humans evolved from social primates to moral primates; how and why morality motivates the human animal; and how the foundation of moral principles can be built upon empirical evidence.

Along the way he explains the implications of scientific findings for fate and free will, the existence of pure good and pure evil, and the development of early moral sentiments among the first humans. As he closes the divide between science and morality, Shermer draws on stories from the Yanamamö, infamously known as the "fierce people" of the tropical rain forest, to the Stanford studies on jailers' behavior in prisons. The Science of Good and Evil is ultimately a profound look at the moral animal, belief, and the scientific pursuit of truth.
i remember you posting this. i didnt respond because i dont really know how to. its interesting, but its also so vague, its an introduction to the beginning of something we dont know anything about. it will be interesting to see where this goes, but so far it hasnt gone far.

the other issue, is that evolutionary psychology is almost always pseudoscience. we dont understand that much about the psychology of creatures we can study live, how the hell can we speak with confidence about creatures that died millenia ago? always assume evolutionary psychology is pseudoscience, until you read it thoroughly and it convinces you it is not.
hot dragon is offline  
Old September 16th, 2015, 09:21 PM   #96
Senior Member
 
Asimov's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2015
Location: Minnesota
Posts: 1,881
Quote:
Originally Posted by hot dragon View Post
"demographics is not destiny" was an election campaign slogan once in australia.

i realise everyone is different, the life history i presented as being "yours" was a general statement, it is in general terms accurate for most people, there are exceptions and yes people change and re-evaluate their values over time. sometimes people re-evaluate their values through the process of reading religious texts. i consider this exactly as valuable as reading any other text written by human beings, it exposes you to new ideas and principles and you might learn something new. but you will always judge these religious texts against your own conscience. when you read a parable where jesus speaks of the master beating his slaves, you, because you are a good person, do not interpret this as meaning slavery is ok.

i think thats the timeline, you decide something is right or wrong, then use the bible to justify that decision. not everybody does this, there are instances on this earth where it goes the other way ; where people decide that a particular religious text is THE TRUTH and dont invoke their own conscience. they just say 'what does the religious book say?" and follow that.

if you were muslim, and you were living in what used to be iraq or syria, that is exactly what you would do. there are many muslims who read the quran and see that it does say slavery is ok, and it does say its ok to rape your slaves, and so those people do hold slaves and do rape them. and they do so with a clear conscience, because its moral. it must be, says so in the quran.

i realise the quran is not the bible, just a demonstration of what can happen if people use a religious book instead of their own human judgement. christianity has a much better record than islam, but not a flawless one.
Yeah, you're right. The passage about beating the slave is NOT Christ condoning either slavery or beating. It is about a servant being entrusted to act responsibly in his master's absence, who then takes advantage of the situation and acts dishonorably. That person should expect to be chastised. In modern context: if you are caught stealing company property while on the job, you should expect to be fired. That's basically what Christ was talking about. But I can see how it could be misconstrued.

YES, ABSOLUTELY I don't read the Bible as a list of rules set in stone that must be followed word for word. I believe God expects us to apply some common sense. If two teams are competing, and the home team coach says "I want you to go out there and punish those guys for invading your turf," he's not advocating gang warfare. To understand somebody, honesty requires that you sometimes have to look beyond the literal words and try to understand what the person is actually saying. That's where I part company with the religious right, who take the bible word for word and don't make an effort to really understand what is being said. Intellectual honesty demands it.
Asimov is offline  
Old September 16th, 2015, 11:08 PM   #97
Senior Member
 
hot dragon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: australia
Posts: 9,417
Quote:
Originally Posted by Asimov View Post
Yeah, you're right. The passage about beating the slave is NOT Christ condoning either slavery or beating. It is about a servant being entrusted to act responsibly in his master's absence, who then takes advantage of the situation and acts dishonorably. That person should expect to be chastised. In modern context: if you are caught stealing company property while on the job, you should expect to be fired. That's basically what Christ was talking about. But I can see how it could be misconstrued.

YES, ABSOLUTELY I don't read the Bible as a list of rules set in stone that must be followed word for word. I believe God expects us to apply some common sense. If two teams are competing, and the home team coach says "I want you to go out there and punish those guys for invading your turf," he's not advocating gang warfare. To understand somebody, honesty requires that you sometimes have to look beyond the literal words and try to understand what the person is actually saying. That's where I part company with the religious right, who take the bible word for word and don't make an effort to really understand what is being said. Intellectual honesty demands it.
i think thats great, hell i have read the bible and there are parts of it i love and things i have learned from it. my favorite part is the prostitute the people bring before jesus to stone and he says "let he who is without sin cast the first stone". brilliant. if everyone would think about this parable before they passed judgement on each other there would be less injustice in the world.

the bible is deliberately vague. using your analogy its like a coach who says "ok, we are behind, we need to pull out everything we have this half, give them something special" inspiring words for some of the team. but one of them might take it too far and start breaking the rules and injuring the opposition players. not what the coach intended, but you can see how it could be taken that way.

on another thread i once posted a view (not my words, but good ones) that the bible is like a gold mine. its full of wealth and its worth exploring. but like any gold mine, its 99% dirt. the valuable stuff is buried in lots and lots of rubbish.

but, i dont think this is so because it is inspired by the creator of the universe. i think it was written by people who may well have believed what they wrote, but that applies to any religious book, and they cannot all be right. and i think the gold mine analogy applies to non religious things. there are lessons about passing judgement in the lord of the rings, there are parables about loving your neighbour in harry potter. the fact that something is religious doesnt make it a better teacher than something non religious.
hot dragon is offline  
Old September 17th, 2015, 03:22 AM   #98
Senior Member
 
Asimov's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2015
Location: Minnesota
Posts: 1,881
Quote:
Originally Posted by hot dragon View Post
i think thats great, hell i have read the bible and there are parts of it i love and things i have learned from it. my favorite part is the prostitute the people bring before jesus to stone and he says "let he who is without sin cast the first stone". brilliant. if everyone would think about this parable before they passed judgement on each other there would be less injustice in the world.

the bible is deliberately vague. using your analogy its like a coach who says "ok, we are behind, we need to pull out everything we have this half, give them something special" inspiring words for some of the team. but one of them might take it too far and start breaking the rules and injuring the opposition players. not what the coach intended, but you can see how it could be taken that way.

on another thread i once posted a view (not my words, but good ones) that the bible is like a gold mine. its full of wealth and its worth exploring. but like any gold mine, its 99% dirt. the valuable stuff is buried in lots and lots of rubbish.

but, i dont think this is so because it is inspired by the creator of the universe. i think it was written by people who may well have believed what they wrote, but that applies to any religious book, and they cannot all be right. and i think the gold mine analogy applies to non religious things. there are lessons about passing judgement in the lord of the rings, there are parables about loving your neighbour in harry potter. the fact that something is religious doesnt make it a better teacher than something non religious.
I cannot consider taking issue with your analysis. It's pretty right on (except the part about original divine inspiration). But if the divine spark is present in all of us, then anyone can be inspired by universal truth. Just read the teachings of Siddhartha and one can see divine truth, even though he was not a religious man. My explanation would be that in his calm meditation he tapped into a resource from within, and was more concerned with the message than with the source.
Asimov is offline  
Old September 17th, 2015, 04:32 AM   #99
Coconut Lure
 
webguy4's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: Michigan
Posts: 15,991
"deliberately vague"?

I challenge you to wright something, anything down, and have it translated across 3 languages over thousands of years and not have somebody twist the meaning.
webguy4 is offline  
Old September 17th, 2015, 04:36 AM   #100
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: massachusetts
Posts: 11,285
Quote:
Originally Posted by Athena View Post
How do these morals compare with Christian morals?

Revere and greet your elders.
Console the poor and the afflicted with good works and words.
Follow not the madman who honor neither father nor mother; they are like animals, for they neither take nor hear advice.
Do not mock the old, the sick, the maimed, or one who has sinned.
Do not set a bad example, or speak indiscreetly, or interrupt the speech of another.
If you are asked something, reply soberly and without affection or flattery or prejudice to others.
Wherever you go, walk with a peaceful air, and do not make wry faces or improper gestures.
Those are superior to the morals of most Christians.
Sound's like the First People kind of stuff.
goober is offline  
Reply

  Defending The Truth Political Forum > Philosophy and Religion > Religion > Atheism

Tags
atheists, group, moral, religious



Search tags for this page
Click on a term to search for related topics.
Thread Tools
Display Modes


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Moral Atheists? Franklin Atheism 51 February 7th, 2017 07:35 PM
Religious Leaders On Senate Torture Report: 'Complete Moral Bankruptcy' LongWinded Christianity 0 December 10th, 2014 01:49 PM
The Religious Right Champions Moral Relevitism In Defense Of Phil Robertson skews13 Current Events 44 January 21st, 2014 11:33 AM
If Atheists Acted Religious ... tristanrobin Gay and Lesbian Rights 84 February 14th, 2012 01:26 PM
Religious people discriminate Atheists DONT!! Adam&Steve Religion 7 March 2nd, 2007 01:44 PM


Facebook Twitter RSS Feed



Copyright © 2005-2013 Defending The Truth. All rights reserved.