If we agree that religion is the only institution that provides the basis for an absolute moral system, can we really be moral without being religious? Wasn't God the original foundation of everything that is good and just?
Doesn't moral become subjective once you tear down religion? Once we accept that morality is subjective, can we really follow a moral system?
"That's the mistake we made when Darwin showed up. We embraced him and Huxley and Freud, all smiles. And then we discovered that Darwin and our religions didn't mix. Or at least we didn't think they did. We were fools. We tried to budge Darwin and Huxley and Freud. They wouldn't move very well. So, like idiots, we tried knocking down religion. We succeeded pretty well. We lost our faith and went around wondering what life was for. If art was no more than a frustrated outflinging of desire, if religion was no more than self-delusion, what good was life? Faith had always given us answer to all things. But it all went down the drain with Freud and Darwin. We were and still are lost people." -- Ray Bradbury, the Martian Chronicles
Yes. Nothing about atheism implies nihilism, and very few academic atheists are nihilists. The problem is that you're trying to approach atheism from a christian paradigm that says things only matter from a christian context because it presupposes that value only exists within a christian paradigm.
Cameron Clark
The current dictatorship of people that simply want to live "good" lives as presented by the media and their own selfish needs dictates what is moral and what is not. It is only their own interests that form our current morality and they have the power to enforce it on anyone that disagrees.
Religion has been (and still is, in some parts of the world) the same, but usually with some higher structure - now it's the masses and their will.
Connor Long
Yes, but you can't be materialistic and moral since almost all "moral codes" of atheist are driven by idealistic principals that are still abstract whether they are backed by deities or not.
Aaron Jackson
>religion provides the basis for an absolute moral system, yup, that's why cultures with the same religion always have the same morals and religious societies never change their morals.
>Doesn't moral become subjective once you tear down religion? It's subjective anyway. Pretending it's not doesn't make it not.
Samuel Nguyen
Religious moral values are also subjective. They were thought up at some point by someone/some group, and to this day still get amended from time to time by leaders within the religion.
You don't need religion for a moral code.
Ryan Barnes
But what is the justification from following a moral system once God or religion is removed from the equation? Personal preference? Choice? Some arbitrary logic?
Logan Collins
some form of Idealism. Usually one which glorifies the scientific method as being able to solve all woes of humanity and lead to utopia.
Dominic Jones
Social utility. We as humanity have found that, by working together, we can become stronger and happier.
Kevin Powell
But religion only has absolute morals because the religion itself says they are from God.
Just because the religion says they are from God doesn't make true.
Also, several political and social ideologies have moral principles, religion isn't exclusive here.
Cameron Russell
That's two big philosophical fields. (Ethics and Metaethics) Moral realism is possible without religion, actually the naive "christian morality is objective because God" is just a weird form of moral subjectivism, morals as a divine command is a medieval concept but it's still more complex than that.
Ian Howard
Not everybody is happy from the same things. This is the terrain of subjective morals.
You could argue men working together to rape women makes them happy so it is the right thing to do. Or humans working together to raise, slaughter and eat cows is moral because it fills our bellies, but a vegetarian would disagree.
Lincoln Diaz
The other people will try to force you into following it whether you like or not. You can become a fugitive in this world, trying to not follow it, but you won't be able to do much if you don't follow it. Justification? There is none. There doesn't need to be one.
Ayden Smith
I understand this. I am wondering about the social implications of it. Is Humanity ready to accept moral is subjective? Is this something that should be taught to people like Joe Redneck?
Xavier Phillips
Yes, you could. But the larger group that has daughters and wives of their own - and the daughters and wives themselves - will oppose it and punish those that disagree.
Jonathan Martinez
This didn't happen in antiquity.
Hudson Jackson
Without religion having a moral system is LARP, as you don't actually belive that you'll be punished if you break it. You can act withing the framework you chose, but without the fear of God it is pretty much certain that you are going to sin if given the opportunity.
Then there is the problem of defining what is moral, you can either accept that your morality is subjective, and then whybare you bothering, or you can pretend that you are objective and then you are way more deluded than the religious you loath.
Nathan Reyes
Read some existential philosophy buddy, you’ll get the answer
Samuel Perez
First, be a bit more specific. Hard to talk about "antiquity" as one thing - Athens had a bit different rules than, say, Sparta. But generally speaking, whatever the majority agreed upon as most beneficiary for them was what became moral. Slave trade was moral for a very long time, for example.
Aiden Thomas
Das right godboi, you just got EUTHYPHRO'D
Justin Fisher
Doesn't really answer my question.
Grayson Davis
You're still assuming there exists objective morality, and I've just told you that even religion doesn't have objective morality just because it claims it does.
Easton Phillips
>If we agree that religion is the only institution that provides the basis for an absolute moral system >provide ancient argument that we can't agree on that premise. >"didn't really answer my question"
Adam Anderson
I don't care if morality is subjective or not, but I wonder about the social implications of Humans accepting it is subjective. Doesn't it make it harder for Humans to follow a moral code when they accept it is not an absolute ordained by God but a relative matter of personal choice?
People in the past followed morality because of religious and not just social pressure.
Nicholas Nguyen
People often were, and are, religious because of social pressure in the first place.
Liam Reyes
Morality by choice is less common and more worthy than morality by command. Precisely because it is harder.
Lincoln Clark
'Sup.
David Jones
Abrahamic religion is devil worship - yes, you can be moral without religion - you can be immoral without religion as well.
Secular morality is more admirable because religious morality is “be a moral person or suffer eternally”
Levi Kelly
>oesn't it make it harder for Humans to follow a moral code when they accept it is not an absolute ordained by God but a relative matter of personal choice?
Ask yourself. Does it for you? Do you feel like murdering people simply because it isn't a law of the universe that it is wrong?
Liam Gutierrez
How's this autism treating you buddy?
Lucas Hall
Anecdotal evidence is irrelevant. What I feel doesn't matter.
Parker Garcia
So what you're saying is that you're an alien, or doesn't these so-called moral rules apply to you?
Adam Gray
>Can you be moral without religion? Yes because God is God regardless.
Samuel Carter
>How's this autism treating you buddy?
I could spend all day calling people "poopy head" online as well, but I grew out of that before I was 10 years old.
God is real, Abrahamic religion is worship of the devil - like Jesus said.
Follow Moses, spend eternity in hell - that's the rules.
