|
|
|
Dr. Mabuse
Septic Fiend
Sweden
9688 Posts |
 Posted - 07/22/2009 : 01:04:31 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by Hawks
Zebra wrote:Really. For most of us, it's the cultural norms we were taught as children.
For exceptions among humans, read up on sociopathy. |
And I find the exceptions quite interesting. Not for the fact that they lack a moral compass, but because the main reason they seem to act morally is because of fear of retribution. Some christians (mainly) state that humans need a god lest we all turn to murderous savages. Seems to me thay think we are all sociopaths.
|
That would also explain why they are so fearful of atheists.
|
Dr. Mabuse - "When the going gets tough, the tough get Duct-tape..."
Dr. Mabuse whisper.mp3
"Equivocation is not just a job, for a creationist it's a way of life..." Dr. Mabuse
Support American Troops in Iraq:
Send them unarmed civilians for target practice..
Collateralmurder. |
 |
|
|
HalfMooner
Dingaling
Philippines
15831 Posts |
Posted - 07/22/2009 : 02:02:05 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by Dr. Mabuse
[quote]That would also explain why they are so fearful of atheists. |
I agree totally. I think this is one of the few areas where most religious people are being entirely sincere when they condemn atheism. Most truly believe that all morality and ethical behavior comes from sacred texts.
Some weakly atheistic people compound this error by saying it's a good thing that "ignorant" religionists are taught morality by their churches. I think that's a profoundly vile and cynical attitude.
Fundy preachers who are likely to know better will lie to their flocks to maintain their misconception on this issue. It's just too effective a lie for them to avoid using.
I think the source of morality and ethics is a vital issue for atheists in making a breakthrough in acceptance in society at large. When ungodly people are seen as being at least as ethical and moral as religionists, much of the fire will go out of the hatred shown to atheists.
In fact it appears that nonbelievers may even be more moral than religious people on the average, judging by crime rates in the Bible belt vs. those in less religion-wracked areas. If this is so, I would suspect the reason is that we atheists are more self-conscious about our need to constantly make moral decisions, whereas Christians are more likely to rely on their weak understanding of the morally contradictorily Bible, and to fall back on the idea that they can do pretty much anything so long as they get themselves on the good side of Jesus afterwards.
Gathering further statistics about comparative morality could be very helpful, along with further research in science about morality's origins.
|
“Biology is just physics that has begun to smell bad.” —HalfMooner
Here's a link to Moonscape News, and one to its Archive. |
|
|
|
Dude
SFN Die Hard
USA
6891 Posts |
Posted - 07/22/2009 : 02:17:50 [Permalink]
|
Halfmooner said:
In fact it appears that nonbelievers may even be more moral than religious people on the average, judging by crime rates in the Bible belt vs. those in less religion-wracked areas. If this is so, I would suspect the reason is that we atheists are more self-conscious about our need to constantly make moral decisions, whereas Christians are more likely to rely on their weak understanding of the morally contradictorily Bible, and to fall back on the idea that they can do pretty much anything so long as they get themselves on the good side of Jesus afterwards.
|
Correlation does not equal causation, don't commit that fallacy. Poverty and education are the issues most likely linked to crime rates, not religious belief.
Also, people are people. There is nothing anywhere I am aware of that says atheists are less likely to carry out a crime than a religious person.
So lets just stick with what we can support with evidence when making these types of claims.
|
Ignorance is preferable to error; and he is less remote from the truth who believes nothing, than he who believes what is wrong.
-- Thomas Jefferson
"god :: the last refuge of a man with no answers and no argument." - G. Carlin
Hope, n.
The handmaiden of desperation; the opiate of despair; the illegible signpost on the road to perdition. ~~ da filth |
|
|
|
|
HalfMooner
Dingaling
Philippines
15831 Posts |
Posted - 07/22/2009 : 03:13:49 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by Dude
Halfmooner said:
In fact it appears that nonbelievers may even be more moral than religious people on the average, judging by crime rates in the Bible belt vs. those in less religion-wracked areas. If this is so, I would suspect the reason is that we atheists are more self-conscious about our need to constantly make moral decisions, whereas Christians are more likely to rely on their weak understanding of the morally contradictorily Bible, and to fall back on the idea that they can do pretty much anything so long as they get themselves on the good side of Jesus afterwards.
|
Correlation does not equal causation, don't commit that fallacy. Poverty and education are the issues most likely linked to crime rates, not religious belief.
Also, people are people. There is nothing anywhere I am aware of that says atheists are less likely to carry out a crime than a religious person.
So lets just stick with what we can support with evidence when making these types of claims. |
Correlation is about all there is right now, but it's at least enough to suggest further research. The main point that I think can be made right now is that there's no evidence that theism actually promotes morality.
|
“Biology is just physics that has begun to smell bad.” —HalfMooner
Here's a link to Moonscape News, and one to its Archive. |
|
|
|
Hawks
SFN Regular
Canada
1383 Posts |
Posted - 07/22/2009 : 05:59:36 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by HalfMooner
I think the source of morality and ethics is a vital issue for atheists in making a breakthrough in acceptance in society at large. When ungodly people are seen as being at least as ethical and moral as religionists, much of the fire will go out of the hatred shown to atheists. |
Personally, I think that the best way to make this comparison favor atheism is to actually start a new religion or two. These could mandate the sexual mutilation of puppies, spitting eachother in the face as a means of greeting and having regular sessions of eating half baked human babies. In spite of these morals being "objective", I doubt few people would find them acceptable. That SHOULD make people who claim that a god is the source of all morals to actually think. |
METHINKS IT IS LIKE A WEASEL
It's a small, off-duty czechoslovakian traffic warden! |
|
|
|
Simon
SFN Regular
USA
1992 Posts |
Posted - 07/22/2009 : 07:46:03 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by Dude
Halfmooner said:
In fact it appears that nonbelievers may even be more moral than religious people on the average, judging by crime rates in the Bible belt vs. those in less religion-wracked areas. If this is so, I would suspect the reason is that we atheists are more self-conscious about our need to constantly make moral decisions, whereas Christians are more likely to rely on their weak understanding of the morally contradictorily Bible, and to fall back on the idea that they can do pretty much anything so long as they get themselves on the good side of Jesus afterwards.
|
Correlation does not equal causation, don't commit that fallacy. Poverty and education are the issues most likely linked to crime rates, not religious belief.
Also, people are people. There is nothing anywhere I am aware of that says atheists are less likely to carry out a crime than a religious person.
So lets just stick with what we can support with evidence when making these types of claims.
|
But this correlation is also true internationally, where otherwise comparable nations such as Western Europe or Japan that also have a low Religious rate also have a much lower crime rate.
But, it indeed is very weak evidence. |
Look again at that dot. That's here. That's home. That's us. On it everyone you love, everyone you know, everyone you ever heard of, every human being who ever was, lived out their lives. The aggregate of our joy and suffering, thousands of confident religions, ideologies, and economic doctrines, every hunter and forager, every hero and coward, every creator and destroyer of civilization, every king and peasant, every young couple in love, every mother and father, hopeful child, inventor and explorer, every teacher of morals, every corrupt politician, every "superstar," every "supreme leader," every saint and sinner in the history of our species lived there – on a mote of dust suspended in a sunbeam.
Carl Sagan - 1996 |
|
|
|
Dave W.
Info Junkie
USA
26022 Posts |
Posted - 07/22/2009 : 10:38:55 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by Dude
Correlation does not equal causation, don't commit that fallacy. Poverty and education are the issues most likely linked to crime rates, not religious belief. |
And that neatly explains why atheists are underrepresented in prison populations: the poor and uneducated are overrepresented there. |
- Dave W. (Private Msg, EMail)
Evidently, I rock!
Why not question something for a change?
Visit Dave's Psoriasis Info, too. |
|
|
|
Ricky
SFN Die Hard
USA
4907 Posts |
|
|
Dude
SFN Die Hard
USA
6891 Posts |
Posted - 07/22/2009 : 21:16:14 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by Dave W.
Originally posted by Dude
Correlation does not equal causation, don't commit that fallacy. Poverty and education are the issues most likely linked to crime rates, not religious belief. |
And that neatly explains why atheists are underrepresented in prison populations: the poor and uneducated are overrepresented there.
|
Evidence?
I'd be interested to see something that showed the % of atheists in prison and contrasted it to the % in the normal population.
|
Ignorance is preferable to error; and he is less remote from the truth who believes nothing, than he who believes what is wrong.
-- Thomas Jefferson
"god :: the last refuge of a man with no answers and no argument." - G. Carlin
Hope, n.
The handmaiden of desperation; the opiate of despair; the illegible signpost on the road to perdition. ~~ da filth |
|
|
|
|
Dude
SFN Die Hard
USA
6891 Posts |
Posted - 07/22/2009 : 21:37:34 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by Simon
Originally posted by Dude
Halfmooner said:
In fact it appears that nonbelievers may even be more moral than religious people on the average, judging by crime rates in the Bible belt vs. those in less religion-wracked areas. If this is so, I would suspect the reason is that we atheists are more self-conscious about our need to constantly make moral decisions, whereas Christians are more likely to rely on their weak understanding of the morally contradictorily Bible, and to fall back on the idea that they can do pretty much anything so long as they get themselves on the good side of Jesus afterwards.
|
Correlation does not equal causation, don't commit that fallacy. Poverty and education are the issues most likely linked to crime rates, not religious belief.
Also, people are people. There is nothing anywhere I am aware of that says atheists are less likely to carry out a crime than a religious person.
So lets just stick with what we can support with evidence when making these types of claims.
|
But this correlation is also true internationally, where otherwise comparable nations such as Western Europe or Japan that also have a low Religious rate also have a much lower crime rate.
But, it indeed is very weak evidence.
|
Its also not factually accurate Simon.
If you look at homicide rates, then yes, western Europe and Japan tend to have half or less the rate of the US.
But property crimes and drug crimes, not so. These crimes are the same or higher than in the US.
There is no evidence I am aware of that suggests atheists are less likely to engage in criminal activity than a religious person.
Ricky: Yeah, there is an inverse correlation between religious belief and education.
|
Ignorance is preferable to error; and he is less remote from the truth who believes nothing, than he who believes what is wrong.
-- Thomas Jefferson
"god :: the last refuge of a man with no answers and no argument." - G. Carlin
Hope, n.
The handmaiden of desperation; the opiate of despair; the illegible signpost on the road to perdition. ~~ da filth |
|
|
|
|
Baxter
Skeptic Friend
USA
131 Posts |
Posted - 07/23/2009 : 08:46:30 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by Dave W.
Try something less radical, like sex outside of marriage. For many, there's absolutely nothing immoral about it, but for others, it's a sin. |
I agree that there are “gray areas.” But for this example, perhaps we could deduce the moral ideal to “loyalty” or “fidelity.” Certainly people have different ideas of what is a violation of this moral ideal (some may argue that premarital sex is unfaithful to your future spouse, others may disagree), but the general principle is still there. I may see arguments as to what is and what isn't loyal, but not against loyalty itself.Originally posted by Kil
Why not choose God? Most of us here at SFN doubt that God even exists. Why not choose a barber poll? |
Well, I find God a more probable explanation than a barber pole. It depends on how you define God perhaps. I don't find ancient ideas of monotheistic gods as probable. And I agree with what you and Dude are saying about theories vs. not knowing. I think I worded it poorly. I guess I was trying to indicate that it is about probabilities. We can't be 100% sure about a theory, but we still hold it.
Originally posted by Dude
Do you still think slavery is wrong if you are that person? |
Again, it's true that people may choose to interpret the moral principle in a way to justify actions. Pro-slavery arguments didn't argue against being kind to others, they tried to argue that slavery did not violate this rule. They did so by saying that blacks are not created equal (meaning the rule wouldn't apply to them), by saying that the slave system was the best for them anyway, and even that it was a necessary and unavoidable evil, etc. But see, the general principle still stands. People just try to get around it. This is why we believe that we have made social progress in regard to slavery. Because we have moved closer to the moral ideal of treating others fairly.
|
"We tend to scoff at the beliefs of the ancients. But we can't scoff at them personally, to their faces, and this is what annoys me." ~from Deep Thoughts by Jack Handey
"We can be as honest as we are ignorant. If we are, when asked what is beyond the horizon of the known, we must say that we do not know." ~Robert G. Ingersoll
|
| Edited by - Baxter on 07/23/2009 08:50:07 |
|
|
|
BigPapaSmurf
SFN Die Hard
3192 Posts |
Posted - 07/23/2009 : 08:59:11 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by Baxter
And I agree with what you and Dude are saying about theories vs. not knowing. I think I worded it poorly. I guess I was trying to indicate that it is about probabilities. We can't be 100% sure about a theory, but we still hold it.
|
Yes but we can't be even 1% sure about God(s), Theories are testable and reviewed regularly for mistakes and corrections. If something is shown to be in error we MUST accept the new data if it holds up to scrutiny. Scrutinizing God is impossible. |
"...things I have neither seen nor experienced nor heard tell of from anybody else; things, what is more, that do not in fact exist and could not ever exist at all. So my readers must not believe a word I say." -Lucian on his book True History
"...They accept such things on faith alone, without any evidence. So if a fraudulent and cunning person who knows how to take advantage of a situation comes among them, he can make himself rich in a short time." -Lucian critical of early Christians c.166 AD From his book, De Morte Peregrini |
|
|
|
Dr. Mabuse
Septic Fiend
Sweden
9688 Posts |
Posted - 07/23/2009 : 13:28:07 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by Baxter
Originally posted by Dave W.
Try something less radical, like sex outside of marriage. For many, there's absolutely nothing immoral about it, but for others, it's a sin. |
I agree that there are “gray areas.” |
The very fact that there are "grey areas" should be indicative that boundries are not set, not absolute.
|
Dr. Mabuse - "When the going gets tough, the tough get Duct-tape..."
Dr. Mabuse whisper.mp3
"Equivocation is not just a job, for a creationist it's a way of life..." Dr. Mabuse
Support American Troops in Iraq:
Send them unarmed civilians for target practice..
Collateralmurder. |
|
|
|
Dave W.
Info Junkie
USA
26022 Posts |
Posted - 07/23/2009 : 13:53:57 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by Baxter
Originally posted by Dave W.
Try something less radical, like sex outside of marriage. For many, there's absolutely nothing immoral about it, but for others, it's a sin. |
I agree that there are “gray areas.” |
As Mab noted, the gray areas indicate a lack of objectivity.| But for this example, perhaps we could deduce the moral ideal to “loyalty” or “fidelity.” Certainly people have different ideas of what is a violation of this moral ideal (some may argue that premarital sex is unfaithful to your future spouse, others may disagree), but the general principle is still there. I may see arguments as to what is and what isn't loyal, but not against loyalty itself. |
Consider the case where the premarital sex occurs between two people who have every intention of getting married. There's no loyalty or fidelity question involved, but many Christians would find it sinful.
Besides, if it becomes a loyalty question, then there is a huge moral issue for having sex with one's spouse, since it's possible that a divorce will occur and then a re-marriage. Within-marriage sex the first time would then be being unfaithful to one's second spouse. (And divorce is only frowned upon by Catholics. Southern Protestant ministers have just as high a divorce rate as the general population.) |
- Dave W. (Private Msg, EMail)
Evidently, I rock!
Why not question something for a change?
Visit Dave's Psoriasis Info, too. |
|
|
|
Chippewa
SFN Regular
USA
1496 Posts |
Posted - 07/23/2009 : 14:48:44 [Permalink]
|
| Given human history in the broadest sense, cannibalism seems to be considered more immoral and therefore rarer than starving to death. In the Fore tribe of Papua New Guinea cannibalism was customary and acceptable for ritualistic reasons yet people suffered from "kuru", a decease found to be associated with it, as if nature was saying "Ok, if you are going to gobble each other up that's bad for the herd, so here's this virus that kills off those who eat their own." The Fore people eventually believed that cannibalism was immoral or just wrong. Then again, they practiced it for a long time before doctors (outsiders) taught them about the origin of kuru. |
Diversity, independence, innovation and imagination are progressive concepts ultimately alien to the conservative mind.
"TAX AND SPEND" IS GOOD! (TAX: Wealthy corporations who won't go poor even after taxes. SPEND: On public works programs, education, the environment, improvements.) |
|
|
 |
|
|
|
Moral absolutes?
