you just shot yourself in the foot you rateard. You say your an atheist? Then why the fuck did you just quote the main sentence in the whole of the bible " Do unto otheres...etc" THAT is where Morality derives from - The Golden Rule handed down by God to moses.
I am no Buddhist but I recognise that Buddhism has one of the highest moral codes ever created - without any creator god(s). It is my belief that our early ancestors learnt that when they hurt someone, it hurt them too. Like all of us, they felt bad, felt remorse for their actions. So they taught their offspring to be good and kind to others and this was handed down generations, and then got mixed up with religions, whose leaders were all too ready to claim that morality came from them.
@ gigglyduck ( nice name) anyway. Its basically what he's saying, if you want to live among humans with the best experience the 'social contract' must be fulfilled, killers do not fulfil that, they are shunned etc, conscience comes in all the time but people who go a step further use empathy and their experience to improve others' experience why h becomes cyclical. Agree?
@chronicbudha Actually I did watch the video. You said you're morality comes from "the golden rule",which to u comes from human logic. But really it comes from laws based on religion.
"The golden rule" originated from the code of hammurabi, who was the king of babylon, also a god fearing man. Who believe that the god he served, shamash I believe, chose him to bring fourth laws his god wanted his people to follow.
So therefore as an atheist "the golden rule" should be irrelevant to you.
@Anonymous49292 No, atheists should not abandon morality to be atheists.
Before there was society as we have it today, morality came from biological imperatives, logic, and emotional development.
Humans have survival and reproductive instincts, so there is a natural behavioral obligation to the self and the species. Logic and history shows that survival needs are better met when we coexist, cooperate and avoid conflict.
It's as simple as that until emotions and selfishness come into play.
@robtbo But I've never read in ne science or atheist book that based upon experiements we shud b kind to our fellow man.
Now, I have nothing against atheist, I'm a christian not that religious and I don't take myself that serious.
I just kinda got upset recently when some atheist guy who I've never met, came up 2 me and bashed me just bcuz I was wearing a small cross necklace.(we had never spoken b4 and he went crazy!)
I have atheist friends but I've never had a ? about ur morals til then.
@robtbo Also other animals have survival and reproduction instincts and they operate just fine killing to survive. No human contract or golden rules, so really u shud. As atheist u shud want humans 2 revert back 2 our number 1 scientific obligation which is to reproduce, no morals tie into that.
@Anonymous49292 You completely ignore that when we work together our survival needs are met more easily. This gives us reason to coexist, cooperate and avoid conflict with each other.
You sound like you want atheists to be emotionless killing machines. lol
@robtbo Some who I have spoken to already seem like they are really. lol
I don't think you should kill ne1, I just for once want 1 atheist to admit that some of their belief are based upon religious background. Even my father who is a die hard atheist (probably more confident and knowledgeable about it than Ricky Gervais) admits that without religion in the world,humanity, morals and ethics as we know it today, may not exist. Not even science. It takes true faith to be an atheist.
@Anonymous49292 Coming from a Christian family, I admit I was exposed to tenets of Christian morality, specifically, the Golden Rule- do unto others as you would have them do unto you.
BUT: that didn't come about until the first century. The Old Testament wasn't about that at all. Confucius was hip to it 500 years earlier. There are many atheists who will argue that that the major religions borrowed their moral codes from existing philosophies.
The golden rule" originated from the code of hammurabi, who was the king of babylon, also a god fearing man. Who believe that the god he served, shamash I believe, chose him to bring fourth laws his god wanted his people to follow.
But survival for what, what are you surviving for? to continuously reproduce? tell me y do lions want to live,is it because they dont have the capacity for religion or science? what is the goal of the universe? udk
@Anonymous49292 OK, so if you don't believe in Shamash, then Hammurabi just made up the Golden Rule on his own. It's not difficult =D
As an atheist, I feel there is no goal to the universe. There's nothing driving me to survive and reproduce other than biological imperatives. Don't you think that the ability to love and laugh and enjoy all the beauty in the world is fulfilling enough? We can even appreciate the bad times in life, we learn from them and become better.
But what is love, science cannot explain y we feel love or even laugh. Beauty? beauty relevant to what, to the endorphines ur brain releases when u see something pretty, beauty is just naturally made chemicals. Enjoying life for what, life is irrelevant and meaningless.
It's really funny how we are almost the exact opposite, I was raised by devout atheist and u come from a christian home. But i wanna say thanx for having an intelligent conversation with me :)
@Anonymous49292 Knowing that what I feel are chemical reactions in my brain doesn't alter the experience.
I am interactive energy which one day may be completely explained in equations. I'm also a conscious being and no amount of knowledge can change that. Everything I experience is extremely relevant to me. I can't help laughing when I hear something funny. Why try?
Yah, I'm not one of those who waste time arguing against religion. I just try to explain myself and clear up misconceptions.
Parents should determine what morals their kids learn. These days, parents are more apt to lay down rules than to explain why the rules make sense, and I admit, religion can pick up the slack, but it claims morality is handed down from divine command. In all honesty, it's really simple. Wolves, lions and even ants can figure out that it's better to work together for common survival.
how can being man made, explain humanity? How can religious being interpreted by man,explain humanity?
Me personally speaking without religion, I could not say that according to atheism I had no soul, no spirit, no worth, no meaning, no reason (other than reproduction), or that I was just this one dimensional, worthless, purely hollow being.
I think there is so much more to the world, that nothing can explain.
I don't wanna get slammed for this, I'm just commenting but.....
to me as a non-religous christian, who has many atheists, gay, etc. friends, moral/social contract comes from a guideline. Guideline originating from people who had religous beliefs. Once u become an atheist shouldn't you abandon all morals. Morals, at least current morals, being influenced by all types of religions.
B4 any religious documents the world had no morals so y is it bad to kill some1 when theirs nothing governing u.
Everyone gets their morals from the environment around them and society around them. It is something we are shown from a young age when parents say "That is a bad thing" or "That is a good thing to do" It's important to realize that religion is not the only place where morality can come from.
Morality is interesting. You can't say that the sole reason we don't hurt others is so that they don't hurt us as in an agreement. You can't say this because we choose not to hurt even those who we know cannot hurt us. We truly care. We care about a person whose pain we will never feel. That's irrational. I don't believe in a god though.
85% of all US prisoners are Christians who pray daily. Ironically, 85% of the US population is Christian. Coincidence? One might think this means that 15% of prisoners are Atheists but nope, only 0.21% are. Also, last week on march 8th, 2011 in Philadelphia, 21 priests were removed for sexual abuse. Thats 21... from 1 district of 1 city. People claim religion is needed to live a moral life. That claim fails miserably.
Christians over time have had less morals than atheists. Religion has killed millions and millions and millions in the name of some make believe fucking god in the sky
from that angle with that white beard he kind of looks like how god is portrayed to be. or santa claus. it's pretty much the same thing anyway, though.
It doesn't matter how we got here, where we're going, or if anyone created us or not. All that matters is we're here, and we as humans will help other humans so we can achieve our own goals, not some god's. There's no need for a god or goddess or flying spagetti monster to tell us what to do, we do what we do 'cuz we do it, and that's just the way it is.
Your answer is ignorant, you are obviously not a good atheist. Atheist derive their morals from a combination of logical thinking and a rational response to a continuous narrative.
Interesting. But then this raises two other questions: What about the concept of charity? Not nessisarily giving to the Red Cross or Dr. Without Borders, but the concept of helping someone not because you expect something out of it, but because you are a person of good will, and it's the right thing to do. Does the contract apply?
@nebula88 Ran out of room, here's the 2nd question.
The concept of "do onto others as you would like to do onto you", lets say you're a macho man filled with testosterone, and you really like fighting because it makes you feel more like a man. Does that make it more OK to go around randomly picking fights with people?
i want to state that i dont subscribe to a specific religion - the trouble with his argument is that not doing "bad" things because u dont' want "bad" things to happen to u is like inadvertently believing in karma - but if no higher power created us,if its all random chance,then theres no such thing as karma, so something "bad" happening to you is completely unrelated to anything you do for other people because there's no such thing as consequences for your actions if you can get away with it.
Oh, and I forgot, on the subject of morality towards humans, I feel he is right in saying that we only do it for the benefit and that we would gain nothing from killing another human. (except jail time which sucks.)
So we just let it be. And for the record, if you had to eat another human that you didn't know. You would probably eat him to survive. This is the harsh reality that most Christians don't have to face or think about. So they just go on living their happy-go-lucky lives with not a care in the world. That is my opinion on this subject, I hope all you Christians out there think about what is in this text. bye :)
Okay, here's the part where I laugh. HAHA! Now I know this may be jumping out of the border a little bit, but I have to text this. So you think that god is giving you your morality right. WRONG. Lets think about this for a second, you have to eat and stay well to survive, so we kill animals, plants, and bad bacterias. these are all classified as living things, but do we give 2 shits if these certain things live or die. NO. Why? Because it doesn't benefit us and actually hurts our survival rate.
morality has nothing to do with a social contract. if you only avoid hurting others as respect for the golden rule then you truly don't understand the meaning of morals and a soul. i personally feel guilt when i put someone else through pain or wrong them. it has nothing to do with getting caught and though i obey the golden rule, i get these morals from an underlying emotion that drives me to do good, or more importantly, to avoid doing bad. this separates us from the rest of the animals.
@gamerweave1991 why do you assume theres no guilt ? I feel guilt over doing something wrong because I understand how it impacts others and I have empathy. If I harm another I empathize with their state and feel remorse. This also keeps me from making bad choices in the future. I don't need a sky daddy looking over me to feel these things.
doesn't exist, so you end up frying in a pan of fire forever!!!! Why would he create a system out of nothing and create such horrible eternal suffering!!! What does he get out of it!!!
Answer: Nothing! Because he doesn't exist. It's just a boogeyman story to scare all the children (aka grown men and women) into thinking you better do as we say, lest the boogeyman gets you.
would they have to be to risk being burned in a lake of fire, not for 5 hours, which would be plenty of motivation for me. Not for 5 days, which sounds evil to me. Not for 5 years, not 500 year, not even 5,000,000,000 years! Nope, were talking a gazillion times that much! Do christians ever think, "wow, this god in the bible is one pretty evil dude! He creates a bunch of people, & then sets up the world in a way that if you're smart, you rationally "realize" that he
@chronicbudha I agree with you all the way. If anything, an atheists will to do good is much more noble than a christian's desire to do good, because there is no implied reward, no heaven or hell. Atheists are good for goodness' sake. But what I've always thought is that 99% of Christians don't really believe in heaven & hell. If they honestly did, how could they possibly ever risk going to hell for eternity. Why would you ever cheat, lie, steal, etc? If they really believed it, how stupid
Professor Grayling said that the "golden rule" shouldn't be a standard of morality because... well, people have differing views on what they would like done to them.
e.g. a sadist might want to hurt you and he has no problem of you hurting him.
@l3lip Thats precisely WHY we have different cultures and social norms within different cultures. No system is perfect, not even the social contract, but until someone can come up with a better way it's all we really have. Until then, it's more or less majority rule.
@l3lip Thats precisely WHY we have different cultures and social norms within different cultures. No system is perfect, not even the social contract, but until someone can come up with a better way it's all we really have. Until then, it's more or less majority rule.
@gamerweave1991 yes, but that is an inate sense of reasoning ingrained into your sould by God ! You also mention that this separates us from other animals, So how did evolution pull that one off !??
Decent and intelligent people, regardless of their belief, have a universal sense of decency, justice and morality; these values are first and foremost human values that we as a conscious species driven by our instinct for self-preservation and our desire to thrive have opted for in order to reduce conflict and live in peace with each other.
Simpletons can’t figure it out on their own so they get their morality from religion which unfortunately reflects the morality of primitive societies.
look what athest do. gay marches and mock god and would sell there soul to deny god and believe they are apes from some big bang then accept jesus is real and died for them.
let ,me guess you voted for obama and are for gay rights and abortiong babys which you will not even call babys right? sure you are.
@mrcooldude964 No. An atheist's morality is better than a theists and here is why. When you are kind to someone, you do it for one of two reasons: 1) because you think you'll get rewarded later, or 2) because god is watching and you don't want to get into trouble. So any kindness you do is based in either greed or self-preservation. The atheist has no god watching and is kind for the sake of being kind to a fellow human being. That's its own reward.
@lurkula athest are going to hell so who cares why they do what they do. (nice) dont get you to heaven. there are plenty of (nice) people in hell. just recieve jesus and youll have all eternity to figure it out and youll have god there to talk it over with
@mrcooldude964 ~yawn~ There is no heaven or hell... I realize that thought is too terrifying for you to deal with properly, but if you find comfort in believing in the magic hat in the sky then go for it. Those of us grounded in reality will just enjoy our lives while you waste yours on imaginary friends.
But why shouldn't people hurt each other? That's more of a religious moral or something people might be uncomfortable with, but I'm pretty sure there are people who find it no more moral than giving to charity.
This question (where atheists get their morals from) is always so funny. That would indicate that believers feel the need to kill any random person passing by, but for their own sake (otherwise no heaven) they don't. I'm sure most do not feel like killing random people, see you would say they should kind of get the understanding of the word 'nature' (it's not our nature to kill random people - exceptions there)....But on the other hand: Reasoning and religion just never go hand in hand..
There are three models of Government competing for world domination:
(1) Communist / atheist: where government officials decide and dole out your temporal rights if any
(2) Sharia Law: where the Qu'ron governs
(3) Judeo-Christian model, where God grants our rights & liberties and THEREFORE they are unalienable, power resides in we the people, we are sovereign and the government is our servant.
If the religios people actually were right, then animals would never have any form of morality; yet they have.All animals with higher intellect have also gotten a higher form of morality, which shows that brain power equals the ability to form morality to some extend.Animals dont have a bible or a koran.
Why do christians still ask this question, ive never heard one athiest any where struggle with this question, its really not hard to figure out if your an inteligent being. although if the bibles the only book youve ever read then its no wonder.
Ok, you are right, i was confusing the two. Sorry about that. ok, I still have some questions. Is not hurting another person morally wrong (in your mind) in the first place therefore you have to already have morals to determine that a "social contract" has to be made, yes? You say all morals are based on this "social contract" yet this contract needs a moral bases to begin with. What bases do you determine that hurting another person is wrong?
@psk6565 Hurting another is wrong because I believe that someone hurting me is wrong. Again, AS I EXPLAINED IN THE VIDEO, if you help me, I will help you. If you attack me, I may attack you. When any two people get together they instinctively agree to this simple truth and without it there can be no trust or co-operation. There would be no societies otherwise.
@chronicbudha Well, If one of those people decides to chop of the others head, then it is neither moral nor immoral because the "social contract" has not been established yet. If morals come from an agreement with two or more people then there are no morals before that, according to this idea. Only God Almighty can be the means to human morals. Jesus Christ, who has been God eternally, is the establisher of mans morals even if they do not believe in Him.
@psk6565 There are no absolute morals. Even your god, who says it's wrong to kill, kills. Morals come from empathy. When we learn to cooperate with others, we gain empathy and a better rate of survival. Saying " Jesus dun it " doesn't tell us anything. You may as well have said " the stay puff marshmallow man dun it. ". It would be just as accurate.
@chronicbudha And saying morals come from something that already needs to have morals in order to be established, is like saying empathy (though comes from an already moral person) produces morals. So, you get your morals from empathy, yet you need to be a moral person in order to even be empathetic. You contradict yourself.
@psk6565 do you understand what morals are ? Morality is a system of ideas of right and wrong conduct. They are developed through experience. It doesn't take a genius to understand that a pack is better then solitude. We are social creatures. To maintain something as simple as a tribe takes simple concepts as " beneficial " or " nonbeneficial " so that everyone understands what the tribe finds acceptable and what they don't. It's a consensus mandated by the people and they change it as needed.
Notice that he thinks empathy is a result of morality? That is because the word morality is one of those religious repurposed words. It really means authority. The ethics of many faith-heads is 'master disallows or allows it' and no thought beyond that.
Such is the morality of a toddler, and it is accompanied by the narcissistic traits of a toddler too. Empathy is a vague concept rather than a compelling reaction to witnessing someone's emotional state.
@psk6565 the flaw in your argument is that you dont need to believe in your god to have empathy. Empathy is part of the human psyche, as is any other emotion. And as you said, thats where morality comes from.
@psk6565 --God's moral standards? No thanks! Look at how God rewards child sacrifice for Jephthah, how he arranges the killing of Job's beloved children just because Job trusted God, how God commands his people to rip little girls from the bloody arms of their murdered mothers and take them home to share with YHVH's priests, how he approves of public rape to punish people. Look at the command to practice ritualized cannibalism! What a wonderful pattern for morality!
@chronicbudha So you are saying that the social norm is true and right? Those who go completely against society still somehow get everything they believe from the ideas of the masses? That is like saying that I get my understanding of God from the system of evolution, which has no bases for there even being a creator let alone the biblical God.
@psk6565 I never said anything about " the social norm ". I spoke about the " social contract " which is not the same as " the social norm ". The social contract is an agreement of co-operation. If a person does not wish to co-operate with others, then he/she has decided to alienate themselves. Thus no social interaction.
@chronicbudha Would you fault a society that practiced cannibalism? or practiced rituals that murdered people to satisfy the gods? These are the morals of these people based upon this "social contract," would you try to teach them otherwise?
@psk6565 no. I wouldn't fault them anymore then I would this " Christian nation " that had to learn that slavery, child labor, women as possession, segregation, and forced labor were wrong. This country alone allow thousands to die each year because some corporate god, or religious nut job, doesn't want to or care about the welfare of others. No society is perfect.
@chronicbudha Wait a second. This was the "social contract" of that day and the vast majority agreed on this. The people that went against this agreement in that day were the ones that you say do not co-operate therefore had no social interaction. Who are you to say one social contract is better than another? You see the problem here? You have no grounds to say if the social contract is right or the people who rebel against it are right.
@psk6565 I think your problem is that you are still confusing the social contract with what you call the " social norm ". They are not the same thing. Go back and watch my video again or try google. I tried to make it as simple as I could in the video. Maybe I made it too simple ?
@chronicbudha Hitler decided Jews were in the way of the progression of society and wanted to hurt (murder) all of them and all who stood in his way in order to make a better society. His morals weren't based on this idea that you should not hurt people. What is wrong with this? How do you view him? He does not hold to your "social contract?" Have you ever hurt anyone? Even in your mind?
@psk6565 Hitler claimed to be a Christian and firmly believed in god. The argument that Hitler was an atheist is flast. I'm pretty sure Jeffrey Dahmer believed in god, as did Tim McVeigh. Does that mean you're like them because you believe in god? No... that would be nonsensical.
MMM you are cute jake. I would love a daddy bear like you! i want to rub ur bald head and feel ur fuzzy body on me.. Love your big hands. would love them to be rubbing all over me. mmm i want some of you.
Why is the social contract moral? BTW, not everyone accepts Rousseau's philosophy. So.... giving in to social pressure is moral? Really?
What we call altruism is really just rational self interest only at the group or genetic level. Our genes are selfish and that selfishness gets translated into individual altruism.
Anyone who wishes to read over the comments will see that just like a typical arrogant Christian you made the foolish claim about morality and your deity.
Then when given scriptural support against your claim you attempt to twist and obscure the passages. Claiming I was ignorant etc..
Finally when unable to find scriptural support of your projection on the bible you throw out some insults and run.
Sadly I'd guess your opinion hasn't changed and you'll go on making your silly claims elsewhere.
The explanations aren't desperate, they're concise and logical.
The religious should learn to keep away from the morality argument when the book they hold up so proudly and arrogantly supports slavery, sexism and genocide (etc). Have you even bothered to read what your so called deity considers moral?!? -- Hopefully you'd be shocked and disgusted.
Time to put the bible back with all the other old mythological books and try something based on evidence. -- Or is that idea too novel for you?
So you wish for me to quote your own holy book? How typical...
Is Leviticus 25:44 and Col 3:22 sufficient? Or do you also need NT? Such as 1 Timothy 6:1-2?
Aren't you aware your so called holy books were appealed to for the "proper" treatment of slaves?
Yet where is the repudiation of slavery in the bible? Where is the denouncement of sexism?
Why do you expect me to troll your primitive and boring books? Aren't you making the boastfully claim about your deity? On what evidence do you base this?
You don't be a wimp going and just pasting passage reference numbers and instead you tell me what 'Support' means and then you tell me the context of those passages, how they apply, to whom and when and where they are 'condoned' or are they 'describing',
and,
YES.. actually slavery was a way of life in Rome,
so,
at times when Masters and Slaves converted to Christianity they were advised to treat each other well.
Why?
It THEN EXPLAINS it is because they are EQUALS in Christ.
Really you want me to explain your dull holy books to you? Where are the pasages supporting your own position? Why are you forced to defend or obscure other passages? Or does your deity just enjoy being ambiguous?
Where are the passages containing the repudiation of slavery? Or the denouncement of sexism? (Didn't I ask this before??)
So you are making this boastful claim so where is your evidence? How is the deity you believe to be real responsible for morality? -- Isn't this your main point?
- You think you can just say that the God of the Bible 'supports' slavery, genocide and sexism.
- You think I have to explain to you why your stupid claims are 'not correct'.
- You think I should start from the beginning explaining all the contexts, situations, conditions to all those passages because you are too ignorant and don't know where to even start.
And to the original idea:
- You DON'T have a basis for absolute morality WITHOUT a God.
Isn't it self explanatory? Your holy books contains commands on how to treat slaves rather than the repudiation of slavery. Even with all it's supposed wisdom and power your deity couldn't remove or prevent slavery in the world... instead it commands on their treatment in endorsement.
As for sexism how about 1 Timothy 2 11-15.. How are you going to attempt to ignore and bury that one?
Now I ask yet again where are the passages supporting your position? Where is the denouncement of slavery?
Oh really? So now the slavery isn't the type of slavery where one person owns another? Again how is your holy book giving commands on how to treat slaves not an endorsement of slavery?
Did you even read the passage? I quote "I do not permit a woman to teach or to have authority over a man; she must be silent. 13For Adam was formed first, then Eve."
How can you deny what is evident?
Do you choice not to answer my question because you can't find such a passage? Will you admit projection here?
That is correct. The master does not own the slave but in cases where the master has converted to Christianity then it is declared they are equals in Christ, and, So you propose what next? Instead of being an equal in the household and treated well - the slave should be fired? Stupid. Yes, women are equal to men in Christ. Paul does not permit them to have authority (or teaching position) over a man. The men are then assigned those jobs. So what? You have some kind of problem with that?
Thing is "equal in Christ" as you put it, doesn't stop the slave being beaten by his master. It doesn't stop the slave being owned by the master...
I propose it is immoral to own other humans; that slavery is immoral. Something your deity failed to do...
Again with this "in Christ" business.. pity it has no tangible benefit in reality. Yes I do have a problem with that as it's called sexism and I'm against it...again something your deity and yourself seem alright with.
This is enough for me tonight....why don't you try answering some of my questions while I'm gone?
Answer this "where is the scriptural support of your position?" Do you think you're just projecting what you want to be true onto the scriptures because you're aware of how barbaric they are?
Again - YOU don't make claims for scriptures and then pretend like I am now supposed to 'show you otherwise'.
2000 years of scholars never even came up with those claims but some 'online atheist' makes them then they can show us the reasoning behind them.
and no, I don't have to twist interpretations because I actually understand the context, the theological implications, what was written to who and why and what is 'implied' or not.
What are you saying ElProximo? Is it that the "word of God" can't be taken by word? Why do you think it needs to be interpreted?
My guess would be because you are aware of how horrid some of it is but you don't want to admit it to yourself?
My complaint was the bible has no denouncement of slavery and other immoral acts, rather it has instructions on how to beat your slave and commands women not to teach etc.
Where is the denouncement of these immoral actions?
And my original complaint was that with no denouncement (rather we find endorsement) of many acts we civilized humans find horrid and immoral how can you seriously attempt to claim divine morality?
You must be able to see just how pitiful and laughable such a claim is. The deity found in the bible is not the "author of morality".... the idea is ludicrous and best left in the dark, barbaric and gloomy past where it belongs.
I'd like it if you would stop replying to me. You are not good at this.
At this point you are just making annoying teenager type 'taunt questions' (which are actually bluffs as you don't even know what the answer might be),
and,
You are also making up things and I believe doing so because (like a Hyena) you think its going to frustrate ,me and get me 'spinning in circles' with the repeated ankle nips here,
But your actual 'complaint' is with practical instructions on real treatment and actual relationships between the Master and Slave, and, even to LOVE the other. Roman Slave systems 'could' be bad news but they were not what you suppose (even BEFORE the converted Christians were to make theirs equal and kind relationships), and, Indeed Slaves were often powerful and wealthy, or, there by choice as indentured servants, but, regardless. Christians had new rules to be equals and love who they had.
well i can speak for me as an atheist, i am not a humanitarian i dont help anyone but me and my own, i am the predatory superior creature that evolution made me. fuckall supposed "morality"! especially the pathetic humanitarian morality that so many atheist embrace.
This guys is a preacher. There are no objective morals. No natural causal effect event can be proven to be moral. So when he says we get them from the same place what he means is they come from beliefs about causal effect events.
I help you/you help me is a philosophical stance.
I take from you and help myself is another.
There are many variations.
It's all belief. How you look at something will determine what you see.
- You borrow your morals from the theists around you. Things are just fine as long as you continue borrowing Christian morals from the society around you.
- If you were in a predominantly Nazi culture you would borrow from those.
- From a strictly atheistic world view using your rules, it would help you and others (who can help you) to gas severely retarded, mentally insane, comatose etc.
Which they did in Nazi Germany and which you have NO right to call 'wrong'.
Atheists get their moral values from socity. If you do something bad people hat you for it so you don't do it. And the people who comit crime are either desprite or screwed up in the head.
If this webpage has a designer, who designed your brain? The fool has said There is no God (Psalm 14:1)
but I say unto you, that every one who shall say to his brother, Thou fool, shall be in danger of the hell of fire. (Mat.5:22) who are my brethren? whosoever shall do the will of my Father in heaven, he is my brother (Mat.12:48-50) but the fool has said there is no God
yes it would, if everyone truly followed their religion or belief 100%. but most people in America are christians, that means more christians have a chance to get into prison. so if atheists completely followed their beliefs and christians theirs it would be different. but christians we speak of in prisons don't have enough morals, or just don't follow them. that means that even though you might be called a christians doesn't mean you follow your morals.
so according to social contract, wouldn't people try to find loopholes in this system? lets say a random person walking on the beach sees a really expensive phone on someone's unoccupied towel. If that person is an atheist and takes the phone they will have found a way to get away with stealing without a consequence. there's no way for someone to find them if no one saw them. so if this example worked in a grander scale wouldn't atheism be the cause of many bad things happening?
people that try to find loopholes in the system are usually referred to as " criminals ". Seeing as that over 90% of jailed criminals are theistic, I think that kind of blows your little hypothesis out of the water wouldn't you ?
like people haven't found loopholes in the written word?? being the bible or any other book!...please stop trying to apologize for religion... where in the bible does it say you can't take a cell found you "found" on the beach?...it does say that if i repent, i will be pardoned, so acording to the beble i can take it as long as i feel bad about it...AND i can thank the lord for having "blessed" me with this find, just like your pastor does when he opens envelopes every sunday after church.
according to our belief, there are no loopholes, its called sin. Its stated in the ten commandments that its stealing what is not yours. and yea you can repent, but only if you mean it. otherwise you're just cheating God with a lie. in the end you're just fooling the priest. I disagree with the way priests are paid also, and thats not stated in the bible. plus, the bible has already been proven false scientifically, now look at it from a moral point of view....
forget about the whole God's existence and being saved after death. don't you think the morals that are spoken of in the bible(excluding worshiping God) are actually the best choice for a world like ours? Is it really that important to cancel out religion when its actually thought of by many intelligent people(the founding fathers for example) to be a great set of rules to establish order in a chaotic civilization? do you agree or disagree?
i will agree that the bible can be ONE OF MANY sources of morality. but do you want to kill kids for not listening to their parents? or what do you want to do to a gay person?..today, i understand that wiccan does not equal evil. but the bible will tell you kill them too along with anybody not following the hebrew god....no in general, i rather not take ALL of my morality from this source. how does a wolf know not eat its young? or another wolf's young for that matter?
you are correct with the problems the bible has. I don't know why i used the word bible to define my interpretation of good morality. The bible is an interpretation by us humans. I would like to revise my answer to change it to, instead of the bible, Christianity. the morals that are spoken of, and only by, Jesus Christ. I believe that the words that came from him and nobody else is the greatest source of good morality.
i would certainly say that i live by "do unto others" but the problem again is interpretation..to some people the important thing are the miracles, to others the important thing is the act of comunion and yet others want to kill jews for killing the christ (i am aware he did not teach this)...my point is that if jesus did not mention something specifically then people put words into his mouth...then there are those that say he condoned slavery! is this true?..(i have not seen this in the bible).
I am pretty sure he did not say such a thing, but I'm a little confused about your response. can you go into further detail? What do you mean by "mention something specifically". Do you mean that if he didn't say not to do it, then its not breaking the rules? im not sure what you mean.
exactly that some say that some old testament rules still apply because he did not mention them by name....also about condoning slavery i have heard that itis in the bible but never seen
i agree with this for the most part, and i never agree with anything.. ever
TheStoicPoet 2 weeks ago
you just shot yourself in the foot you rateard. You say your an atheist? Then why the fuck did you just quote the main sentence in the whole of the bible " Do unto otheres...etc" THAT is where Morality derives from - The Golden Rule handed down by God to moses.
DancingMedicineMan 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
O PEOPLE WORSHIP ALLAH YOU HAVE NO GOD BUT HIM
O PEOPLE SAY THERE IS NO GOD BUT ALLAH YOU SHALL SUCCED
PLEASE WATCH THIS VIDEO on youtube
Miracle of Islam, Verses of Quran Appeared on Skin of a 9 months old baby AMAZING! - YouTube2.flv
amine17360 5 months ago
I am no Buddhist but I recognise that Buddhism has one of the highest moral codes ever created - without any creator god(s). It is my belief that our early ancestors learnt that when they hurt someone, it hurt them too. Like all of us, they felt bad, felt remorse for their actions. So they taught their offspring to be good and kind to others and this was handed down generations, and then got mixed up with religions, whose leaders were all too ready to claim that morality came from them.
ThomasTrue 6 months ago
@ gigglyduck which becomes *
ConnorXV 8 months ago
@ gigglyduck ( nice name) anyway. Its basically what he's saying, if you want to live among humans with the best experience the 'social contract' must be fulfilled, killers do not fulfil that, they are shunned etc, conscience comes in all the time but people who go a step further use empathy and their experience to improve others' experience why h becomes cyclical. Agree?
ConnorXV 8 months ago
Morals are to do with your conscience... not a social contract ¬_¬
:)
gigglyduck 8 months ago
@chronicbudha Actually I did watch the video. You said you're morality comes from "the golden rule",which to u comes from human logic. But really it comes from laws based on religion.
"The golden rule" originated from the code of hammurabi, who was the king of babylon, also a god fearing man. Who believe that the god he served, shamash I believe, chose him to bring fourth laws his god wanted his people to follow.
So therefore as an atheist "the golden rule" should be irrelevant to you.
Anonymous49292 9 months ago
Comment removed
Anonymous49292 9 months ago
Comment removed
Anonymous49292 9 months ago
Comment removed
Anonymous49292 9 months ago
Comment removed
Anonymous49292 9 months ago
Comment removed
Anonymous49292 9 months ago
Comment removed
Anonymous49292 9 months ago
Comment removed
Anonymous49292 9 months ago
To an atheist humans should just be a product of a huge scientific accident, so theres no reason a life or anything should have meaning to you.
atheist abandoning their civil morals should be the meaning of being a true atheist. right?
Anonymous49292 9 months ago
@Anonymous49292 No, atheists should not abandon morality to be atheists.
Before there was society as we have it today, morality came from biological imperatives, logic, and emotional development.
Humans have survival and reproductive instincts, so there is a natural behavioral obligation to the self and the species. Logic and history shows that survival needs are better met when we coexist, cooperate and avoid conflict.
It's as simple as that until emotions and selfishness come into play.
robtbo 9 months ago
@robtbo But I've never read in ne science or atheist book that based upon experiements we shud b kind to our fellow man.
Now, I have nothing against atheist, I'm a christian not that religious and I don't take myself that serious.
I just kinda got upset recently when some atheist guy who I've never met, came up 2 me and bashed me just bcuz I was wearing a small cross necklace.(we had never spoken b4 and he went crazy!)
I have atheist friends but I've never had a ? about ur morals til then.
Anonymous49292 9 months ago
@robtbo Also other animals have survival and reproduction instincts and they operate just fine killing to survive. No human contract or golden rules, so really u shud. As atheist u shud want humans 2 revert back 2 our number 1 scientific obligation which is to reproduce, no morals tie into that.
Anonymous49292 9 months ago
@Anonymous49292 You completely ignore that when we work together our survival needs are met more easily. This gives us reason to coexist, cooperate and avoid conflict with each other.
You sound like you want atheists to be emotionless killing machines. lol
robtbo 9 months ago
@robtbo Some who I have spoken to already seem like they are really. lol
I don't think you should kill ne1, I just for once want 1 atheist to admit that some of their belief are based upon religious background. Even my father who is a die hard atheist (probably more confident and knowledgeable about it than Ricky Gervais) admits that without religion in the world,humanity, morals and ethics as we know it today, may not exist. Not even science. It takes true faith to be an atheist.
Anonymous49292 9 months ago
@Anonymous49292 Coming from a Christian family, I admit I was exposed to tenets of Christian morality, specifically, the Golden Rule- do unto others as you would have them do unto you.
BUT: that didn't come about until the first century. The Old Testament wasn't about that at all. Confucius was hip to it 500 years earlier. There are many atheists who will argue that that the major religions borrowed their moral codes from existing philosophies.
(more)
robtbo 9 months ago
@robtbo As I responded to chronicbudha.
The golden rule" originated from the code of hammurabi, who was the king of babylon, also a god fearing man. Who believe that the god he served, shamash I believe, chose him to bring fourth laws his god wanted his people to follow.
But survival for what, what are you surviving for? to continuously reproduce? tell me y do lions want to live,is it because they dont have the capacity for religion or science? what is the goal of the universe? udk
Anonymous49292 9 months ago
@Anonymous49292 OK, so if you don't believe in Shamash, then Hammurabi just made up the Golden Rule on his own. It's not difficult =D
As an atheist, I feel there is no goal to the universe. There's nothing driving me to survive and reproduce other than biological imperatives. Don't you think that the ability to love and laugh and enjoy all the beauty in the world is fulfilling enough? We can even appreciate the bad times in life, we learn from them and become better.
What more does one want?
robtbo 9 months ago
@robtbo
But what is love, science cannot explain y we feel love or even laugh. Beauty? beauty relevant to what, to the endorphines ur brain releases when u see something pretty, beauty is just naturally made chemicals. Enjoying life for what, life is irrelevant and meaningless.
It's really funny how we are almost the exact opposite, I was raised by devout atheist and u come from a christian home. But i wanna say thanx for having an intelligent conversation with me :)
Anonymous49292 9 months ago
@Anonymous49292 Knowing that what I feel are chemical reactions in my brain doesn't alter the experience.
I am interactive energy which one day may be completely explained in equations. I'm also a conscious being and no amount of knowledge can change that. Everything I experience is extremely relevant to me. I can't help laughing when I hear something funny. Why try?
Yah, I'm not one of those who waste time arguing against religion. I just try to explain myself and clear up misconceptions.
robtbo 9 months ago
@Anonymous49292 (cont'd)
Parents should determine what morals their kids learn. These days, parents are more apt to lay down rules than to explain why the rules make sense, and I admit, religion can pick up the slack, but it claims morality is handed down from divine command. In all honesty, it's really simple. Wolves, lions and even ants can figure out that it's better to work together for common survival.
robtbo 9 months ago
@robtbo
how can being man made, explain humanity? How can religious being interpreted by man,explain humanity?
Me personally speaking without religion, I could not say that according to atheism I had no soul, no spirit, no worth, no meaning, no reason (other than reproduction), or that I was just this one dimensional, worthless, purely hollow being.
I think there is so much more to the world, that nothing can explain.
Anonymous49292 9 months ago
@Anonymous49292 how can science*
Anonymous49292 9 months ago
I don't wanna get slammed for this, I'm just commenting but.....
to me as a non-religous christian, who has many atheists, gay, etc. friends, moral/social contract comes from a guideline. Guideline originating from people who had religous beliefs. Once u become an atheist shouldn't you abandon all morals. Morals, at least current morals, being influenced by all types of religions.
B4 any religious documents the world had no morals so y is it bad to kill some1 when theirs nothing governing u.
Anonymous49292 9 months ago
Everyone gets their morals from the environment around them and society around them. It is something we are shown from a young age when parents say "That is a bad thing" or "That is a good thing to do" It's important to realize that religion is not the only place where morality can come from.
DJAnnamarie1993 9 months ago
Morality is interesting. You can't say that the sole reason we don't hurt others is so that they don't hurt us as in an agreement. You can't say this because we choose not to hurt even those who we know cannot hurt us. We truly care. We care about a person whose pain we will never feel. That's irrational. I don't believe in a god though.
SandBarAndYou 10 months ago
Morality derives from nature as does everything else, though if you say that, people think you're a hippy.
willdrake1 10 months ago
85% of all US prisoners are Christians who pray daily. Ironically, 85% of the US population is Christian. Coincidence? One might think this means that 15% of prisoners are Atheists but nope, only 0.21% are. Also, last week on march 8th, 2011 in Philadelphia, 21 priests were removed for sexual abuse. Thats 21... from 1 district of 1 city. People claim religion is needed to live a moral life. That claim fails miserably.
JabberCT 10 months ago 2
I'm a moral nihilist.
weaselrh 10 months ago
Something I learned in psychology in college is to NEVER speak about morals. Morals are made from personal point of views.
Everybody is entitled to their own opinion
btw I am a Christian
acolytes777 10 months ago
Christians over time have had less morals than atheists. Religion has killed millions and millions and millions in the name of some make believe fucking god in the sky
JesusWasAnAsshole 10 months ago
from that angle with that white beard he kind of looks like how god is portrayed to be. or santa claus. it's pretty much the same thing anyway, though.
SandyPrincessPatty 11 months ago
wow..what a guy...and smart.........
stigroald 1 year ago
My morals: I wouldnt want it to happen to me or my friends and family so i dont do it to others.
CoolParkourName 1 year ago
@CoolParkourName You are missing out. It is do onto others BEFORE they do onto you
JesusWasAnAsshole 10 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
It doesn't matter how we got here, where we're going, or if anyone created us or not. All that matters is we're here, and we as humans will help other humans so we can achieve our own goals, not some god's. There's no need for a god or goddess or flying spagetti monster to tell us what to do, we do what we do 'cuz we do it, and that's just the way it is.
Spreading the truth,
MarshmallowRadiation.
MarshmallowRadiation 1 year ago
Your answer is ignorant, you are obviously not a good atheist. Atheist derive their morals from a combination of logical thinking and a rational response to a continuous narrative.
chipthetormentor 1 year ago
I find it confusing that we'd swear to tell the truth in a courtroom
while holding a book of lies.
ronaldsneek 1 year ago 2
Interesting. But then this raises two other questions: What about the concept of charity? Not nessisarily giving to the Red Cross or Dr. Without Borders, but the concept of helping someone not because you expect something out of it, but because you are a person of good will, and it's the right thing to do. Does the contract apply?
nebula88 1 year ago
@nebula88 Ran out of room, here's the 2nd question.
The concept of "do onto others as you would like to do onto you", lets say you're a macho man filled with testosterone, and you really like fighting because it makes you feel more like a man. Does that make it more OK to go around randomly picking fights with people?
nebula88 1 year ago
i want to state that i dont subscribe to a specific religion - the trouble with his argument is that not doing "bad" things because u dont' want "bad" things to happen to u is like inadvertently believing in karma - but if no higher power created us,if its all random chance,then theres no such thing as karma, so something "bad" happening to you is completely unrelated to anything you do for other people because there's no such thing as consequences for your actions if you can get away with it.
just2fine 1 year ago
Oh, and I forgot, on the subject of morality towards humans, I feel he is right in saying that we only do it for the benefit and that we would gain nothing from killing another human. (except jail time which sucks.)
inukami23 1 year ago
So we just let it be. And for the record, if you had to eat another human that you didn't know. You would probably eat him to survive. This is the harsh reality that most Christians don't have to face or think about. So they just go on living their happy-go-lucky lives with not a care in the world. That is my opinion on this subject, I hope all you Christians out there think about what is in this text. bye :)
inukami23 1 year ago
Okay, here's the part where I laugh. HAHA! Now I know this may be jumping out of the border a little bit, but I have to text this. So you think that god is giving you your morality right. WRONG. Lets think about this for a second, you have to eat and stay well to survive, so we kill animals, plants, and bad bacterias. these are all classified as living things, but do we give 2 shits if these certain things live or die. NO. Why? Because it doesn't benefit us and actually hurts our survival rate.
inukami23 1 year ago
morality has nothing to do with a social contract. if you only avoid hurting others as respect for the golden rule then you truly don't understand the meaning of morals and a soul. i personally feel guilt when i put someone else through pain or wrong them. it has nothing to do with getting caught and though i obey the golden rule, i get these morals from an underlying emotion that drives me to do good, or more importantly, to avoid doing bad. this separates us from the rest of the animals.
gamerweave1991 1 year ago
@gamerweave1991 why do you assume theres no guilt ? I feel guilt over doing something wrong because I understand how it impacts others and I have empathy. If I harm another I empathize with their state and feel remorse. This also keeps me from making bad choices in the future. I don't need a sky daddy looking over me to feel these things.
chronicbudha 1 year ago
Comment removed
chechomsky 1 year ago
Comment removed
chechomsky 1 year ago
doesn't exist, so you end up frying in a pan of fire forever!!!! Why would he create a system out of nothing and create such horrible eternal suffering!!! What does he get out of it!!!
Answer: Nothing! Because he doesn't exist. It's just a boogeyman story to scare all the children (aka grown men and women) into thinking you better do as we say, lest the boogeyman gets you.
chechomsky 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
5 minutes ago
would they have to be to risk being burned in a lake of fire, not for 5 hours, which would be plenty of motivation for me. Not for 5 days, which sounds evil to me. Not for 5 years, not 500 year, not even 5,000,000,000 years! Nope, were talking a gazillion times that much! Do christians ever think, "wow, this god in the bible is one pretty evil dude! He creates a bunch of people, & then sets up the world in a way that if you're smart, you rationally "realize" that he
chechomsky 1 year ago
@chronicbudha I agree with you all the way. If anything, an atheists will to do good is much more noble than a christian's desire to do good, because there is no implied reward, no heaven or hell. Atheists are good for goodness' sake. But what I've always thought is that 99% of Christians don't really believe in heaven & hell. If they honestly did, how could they possibly ever risk going to hell for eternity. Why would you ever cheat, lie, steal, etc? If they really believed it, how stupid
chechomsky 1 year ago
@chronicbudha
Professor Grayling said that the "golden rule" shouldn't be a standard of morality because... well, people have differing views on what they would like done to them.
e.g. a sadist might want to hurt you and he has no problem of you hurting him.
How would you respond to that?
l3lip 4 months ago
@l3lip Thats precisely WHY we have different cultures and social norms within different cultures. No system is perfect, not even the social contract, but until someone can come up with a better way it's all we really have. Until then, it's more or less majority rule.
chronicbudha 4 months ago
@l3lip Thats precisely WHY we have different cultures and social norms within different cultures. No system is perfect, not even the social contract, but until someone can come up with a better way it's all we really have. Until then, it's more or less majority rule.
chronicbudha 4 months ago
@gamerweave1991 yes, but that is an inate sense of reasoning ingrained into your sould by God ! You also mention that this separates us from other animals, So how did evolution pull that one off !??
SugaNutt 1 year ago
What scares me is people who need the Bible to tell them whats right and wrong.
Didn't they know the diference without it?
Andrewcranky 1 year ago
@Andrewcranky some do and some really don't or they are great actors. fear stops thought which dulls reasoning. a safe bubble for many.
illusionstateofmind 1 year ago
athiests have no morality they. Sense they have no souls.
caller347 1 year ago
@caller347 Wether or not I or you or anyone has a soul is not really the issue.
I know right from wrong, and I don't need the Bible, or the Koran, or any modern day shaman to know the diference between the one or the other.
I do the right think, not becouse I fear hell of desire Gods appoval, but becouse it's simply the right thing to do.
Andrewcranky 1 year ago
@Andrewcranky you do know I was kidding right? Jezz atheists and theists take things way too seriously.
caller347 1 year ago
Religion is for weak people or people that have been brain washed as a child. To thick to understand science try religion.
milkwhitedark 1 year ago
Decent and intelligent people, regardless of their belief, have a universal sense of decency, justice and morality; these values are first and foremost human values that we as a conscious species driven by our instinct for self-preservation and our desire to thrive have opted for in order to reduce conflict and live in peace with each other.
Simpletons can’t figure it out on their own so they get their morality from religion which unfortunately reflects the morality of primitive societies.
GODandPEACE 1 year ago
where do athest get there morality? from satan.
look what athest do. gay marches and mock god and would sell there soul to deny god and believe they are apes from some big bang then accept jesus is real and died for them.
let ,me guess you voted for obama and are for gay rights and abortiong babys which you will not even call babys right? sure you are.
mrcooldude964 1 year ago
@mrcooldude964 No. An atheist's morality is better than a theists and here is why. When you are kind to someone, you do it for one of two reasons: 1) because you think you'll get rewarded later, or 2) because god is watching and you don't want to get into trouble. So any kindness you do is based in either greed or self-preservation. The atheist has no god watching and is kind for the sake of being kind to a fellow human being. That's its own reward.
lurkula 1 year ago
@lurkula athest are going to hell so who cares why they do what they do. (nice) dont get you to heaven. there are plenty of (nice) people in hell. just recieve jesus and youll have all eternity to figure it out and youll have god there to talk it over with
mrcooldude964 1 year ago
@mrcooldude964 ~yawn~ There is no heaven or hell... I realize that thought is too terrifying for you to deal with properly, but if you find comfort in believing in the magic hat in the sky then go for it. Those of us grounded in reality will just enjoy our lives while you waste yours on imaginary friends.
lurkula 1 year ago
BLIND
MERCURHILLMANIAC 1 year ago
Our morals evolved.
Arcrer 1 year ago
But why shouldn't people hurt each other? That's more of a religious moral or something people might be uncomfortable with, but I'm pretty sure there are people who find it no more moral than giving to charity.
Catholicism4ever 1 year ago
This question (where atheists get their morals from) is always so funny. That would indicate that believers feel the need to kill any random person passing by, but for their own sake (otherwise no heaven) they don't. I'm sure most do not feel like killing random people, see you would say they should kind of get the understanding of the word 'nature' (it's not our nature to kill random people - exceptions there)....But on the other hand: Reasoning and religion just never go hand in hand..
PowerRedBull 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Maybe religion is something that was invented by a superpowered bully because He liked sacrifices and prayers.
boiledliddo 1 year ago
I've seen dogs express empathy many times.
matchu4444 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
There are three models of Government competing for world domination:
(1) Communist / atheist: where government officials decide and dole out your temporal rights if any
(2) Sharia Law: where the Qu'ron governs
(3) Judeo-Christian model, where God grants our rights & liberties and THEREFORE they are unalienable, power resides in we the people, we are sovereign and the government is our servant.
Mr88playmaker 1 year ago
Not to mention our parents influence. People follow their parents example portrayed to them as kids.
blainethebassist 1 year ago
well said!
nunobelo 1 year ago
nice vid!
i'd like to add two lines to that social contract!
I agree to hurt you if you hurt me.
and
I agree to not help you if you don't help me.
the original contract would allow someone to help someone else that never helped back.
the original contract would allow someone to not hurt someone that was hurting them.
I think those two additional lines make the contract more comprehensive.
patternmachine 1 year ago
atheist have morals? this is new, i thought they just spent all day online trolling
NobodyVeryImportant 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@NobodyVeryImportant atheist have morals? this is new, i thought they just spent all day online trolling, comon harden up churchy
azmanabdula 1 year ago
@NobodyVeryImportant lol infact there are no creationist - they all just atheist trolls
badpanda84 1 year ago
Morals evolved from the balance of our need to be in an organized, helpful community and our personal wants and desires
AgentRiot13 1 year ago
It's also part of the idea, what you send out comes back to you.
theallseeingoracle 1 year ago
The video maker is right.
If the religios people actually were right, then animals would never have any form of morality; yet they have.All animals with higher intellect have also gotten a higher form of morality, which shows that brain power equals the ability to form morality to some extend.Animals dont have a bible or a koran.
Bratcipheo 1 year ago
Why do christians still ask this question, ive never heard one athiest any where struggle with this question, its really not hard to figure out if your an inteligent being. although if the bibles the only book youve ever read then its no wonder.
696codeman 1 year ago 8
Its that simple and people still don't get it.
mosaicmaster1 1 year ago
I get my morals from my experiences with real live people, thank you very much.
BoredomCorner 1 year ago
Ok, you are right, i was confusing the two. Sorry about that. ok, I still have some questions. Is not hurting another person morally wrong (in your mind) in the first place therefore you have to already have morals to determine that a "social contract" has to be made, yes? You say all morals are based on this "social contract" yet this contract needs a moral bases to begin with. What bases do you determine that hurting another person is wrong?
psk6565 1 year ago
@psk6565 Hurting another is wrong because I believe that someone hurting me is wrong. Again, AS I EXPLAINED IN THE VIDEO, if you help me, I will help you. If you attack me, I may attack you. When any two people get together they instinctively agree to this simple truth and without it there can be no trust or co-operation. There would be no societies otherwise.
chronicbudha 1 year ago
@chronicbudha Well, If one of those people decides to chop of the others head, then it is neither moral nor immoral because the "social contract" has not been established yet. If morals come from an agreement with two or more people then there are no morals before that, according to this idea. Only God Almighty can be the means to human morals. Jesus Christ, who has been God eternally, is the establisher of mans morals even if they do not believe in Him.
psk6565 1 year ago
@psk6565 There are no absolute morals. Even your god, who says it's wrong to kill, kills. Morals come from empathy. When we learn to cooperate with others, we gain empathy and a better rate of survival. Saying " Jesus dun it " doesn't tell us anything. You may as well have said " the stay puff marshmallow man dun it. ". It would be just as accurate.
chronicbudha 1 year ago 2
@chronicbudha And saying morals come from something that already needs to have morals in order to be established, is like saying empathy (though comes from an already moral person) produces morals. So, you get your morals from empathy, yet you need to be a moral person in order to even be empathetic. You contradict yourself.
psk6565 1 year ago
@psk6565 do you understand what morals are ? Morality is a system of ideas of right and wrong conduct. They are developed through experience. It doesn't take a genius to understand that a pack is better then solitude. We are social creatures. To maintain something as simple as a tribe takes simple concepts as " beneficial " or " nonbeneficial " so that everyone understands what the tribe finds acceptable and what they don't. It's a consensus mandated by the people and they change it as needed.
chronicbudha 1 year ago 4
@chronicbudha
Notice that he thinks empathy is a result of morality? That is because the word morality is one of those religious repurposed words. It really means authority. The ethics of many faith-heads is 'master disallows or allows it' and no thought beyond that.
Such is the morality of a toddler, and it is accompanied by the narcissistic traits of a toddler too. Empathy is a vague concept rather than a compelling reaction to witnessing someone's emotional state.
bezzleboo 1 year ago
@psk6565 the flaw in your argument is that you dont need to believe in your god to have empathy. Empathy is part of the human psyche, as is any other emotion. And as you said, thats where morality comes from.
Potandthekettle 1 year ago
lizazoon 1 year ago
@psk6565 You are truly retarded. I should be able to kill you, you fucking ant.
grayziehobbes 1 year ago
Morality has NOTHING to do with religion.
it's way and way older than religion!
tomnackom3 1 year ago
Where do those, who go completely against the "social contract," get their morals from?
psk6565 1 year ago
@psk6565 Thats like asking " where do those who go completely against " gravity " get their weight from ? "
chronicbudha 1 year ago
@chronicbudha So you are saying that the social norm is true and right? Those who go completely against society still somehow get everything they believe from the ideas of the masses? That is like saying that I get my understanding of God from the system of evolution, which has no bases for there even being a creator let alone the biblical God.
psk6565 1 year ago
@psk6565 I never said anything about " the social norm ". I spoke about the " social contract " which is not the same as " the social norm ". The social contract is an agreement of co-operation. If a person does not wish to co-operate with others, then he/she has decided to alienate themselves. Thus no social interaction.
chronicbudha 1 year ago
@chronicbudha Would you fault a society that practiced cannibalism? or practiced rituals that murdered people to satisfy the gods? These are the morals of these people based upon this "social contract," would you try to teach them otherwise?
psk6565 1 year ago
@psk6565 no. I wouldn't fault them anymore then I would this " Christian nation " that had to learn that slavery, child labor, women as possession, segregation, and forced labor were wrong. This country alone allow thousands to die each year because some corporate god, or religious nut job, doesn't want to or care about the welfare of others. No society is perfect.
chronicbudha 1 year ago
@chronicbudha Wait a second. This was the "social contract" of that day and the vast majority agreed on this. The people that went against this agreement in that day were the ones that you say do not co-operate therefore had no social interaction. Who are you to say one social contract is better than another? You see the problem here? You have no grounds to say if the social contract is right or the people who rebel against it are right.
psk6565 1 year ago
@psk6565 I think your problem is that you are still confusing the social contract with what you call the " social norm ". They are not the same thing. Go back and watch my video again or try google. I tried to make it as simple as I could in the video. Maybe I made it too simple ?
chronicbudha 1 year ago
@chronicbudha Hitler decided Jews were in the way of the progression of society and wanted to hurt (murder) all of them and all who stood in his way in order to make a better society. His morals weren't based on this idea that you should not hurt people. What is wrong with this? How do you view him? He does not hold to your "social contract?" Have you ever hurt anyone? Even in your mind?
psk6565 1 year ago
@psk6565 If you have to bring up Hitler, you've already lost the debate. Godwins law. Look it up. :)
chronicbudha 1 year ago
@psk6565 Hitler claimed to be a Christian and firmly believed in god. The argument that Hitler was an atheist is flast. I'm pretty sure Jeffrey Dahmer believed in god, as did Tim McVeigh. Does that mean you're like them because you believe in god? No... that would be nonsensical.
lurkula 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Evolution supplies all that is needed for the development
of codes of conduct that preserve and facilitate
survival and co-operation,
which is precisely what these "laws" do.
Such sensitivities in no way support your particular god.
In fact, as Christians believe that their most heinous acts
will be magically vanished and forgotten via human sacrifice,
they actually have very little incentive to act in a moral manner.
Hmmm..
That just might explain a hell of a lot.
Imaginefree69 1 year ago
When I help someone I always ask a payment in return, a payment that I generally never know was paid, anything else I refuse.
Like you said I help you help someone else, that's the payment.
robvlob 2 years ago
MMM you are cute jake. I would love a daddy bear like you! i want to rub ur bald head and feel ur fuzzy body on me.. Love your big hands. would love them to be rubbing all over me. mmm i want some of you.
koejo1 2 years ago
@koejo1 LMAO
adean2 1 year ago
some people are not keeping their social contract
majorl31 2 years ago
Why is the social contract moral? BTW, not everyone accepts Rousseau's philosophy. So.... giving in to social pressure is moral? Really?
What we call altruism is really just rational self interest only at the group or genetic level. Our genes are selfish and that selfishness gets translated into individual altruism.
Are selfish genes moral genes? If so why?
1noen1 2 years ago
Anyone who wishes to read over the comments will see that just like a typical arrogant Christian you made the foolish claim about morality and your deity.
Then when given scriptural support against your claim you attempt to twist and obscure the passages. Claiming I was ignorant etc..
Finally when unable to find scriptural support of your projection on the bible you throw out some insults and run.
Sadly I'd guess your opinion hasn't changed and you'll go on making your silly claims elsewhere.
DistinctiveBlend 2 years ago
we evolved morals
patrickledford420 2 years ago
Nope.
Despite desperate attempts to explain morality by 'just so stories' in some imaginary 'evolution' context,
No.
But you are not even getting the bigger picture here.
Its a question of what would be 'morally right' or 'wrong' in an atheistic world view.
It's a bigger question than you can handle so best you go STFU and sit down.
Thx.
ElProximo 2 years ago
The explanations aren't desperate, they're concise and logical.
The religious should learn to keep away from the morality argument when the book they hold up so proudly and arrogantly supports slavery, sexism and genocide (etc). Have you even bothered to read what your so called deity considers moral?!? -- Hopefully you'd be shocked and disgusted.
Time to put the bible back with all the other old mythological books and try something based on evidence. -- Or is that idea too novel for you?
DistinctiveBlend 2 years ago
First I want to say I'm really disappointed to see you participating in this pathetic 'catchphrase' gimmick where you go to Theists and type:
"after all your bible supports slavery, genocide, sexism".
Its so pathetic and its even worse how many of you go 'copypasting' that over and over because you 'think' it must be a 'winner',
but,
Yes, I would absolutely love to engage in a discussion about your mistake, shitty childish misunderstanding,
and,
the moral implications.
If you were capable?
ElProximo 2 years ago
Call it a catchphrase and pathetic if you want...but I noticed you didn't attempt deny it.
Instead you went with the typical name calling attack... I'm surprised you didn't call me a fool or ignorant. ^^
But please do explain how your flavor of deity is the arbiter of morality as I am in need of entertainment.
DistinctiveBlend 2 years ago
I think calling it 'pathetic' could easily be understood to be 'denying it.
You made the stupid claim so go right ahead and tell me what do you mean by 'support' and how slaver is 'supported' by God.
Keep in mind - Slavery (a long long human tradition) was done away with as soon as Christianity took any authority in Rome,
and,
when slavery tried to make a comeback - Christians promptly abolished it.
But tell me about your idiot claim God 'supports' slavery?
Really explain it too.
or try lol?
ElProximo 2 years ago
So you wish for me to quote your own holy book? How typical...
Is Leviticus 25:44 and Col 3:22 sufficient? Or do you also need NT? Such as 1 Timothy 6:1-2?
Aren't you aware your so called holy books were appealed to for the "proper" treatment of slaves?
Yet where is the repudiation of slavery in the bible? Where is the denouncement of sexism?
Why do you expect me to troll your primitive and boring books? Aren't you making the boastfully claim about your deity? On what evidence do you base this?
DistinctiveBlend 2 years ago
Nope.
You don't be a wimp going and just pasting passage reference numbers and instead you tell me what 'Support' means and then you tell me the context of those passages, how they apply, to whom and when and where they are 'condoned' or are they 'describing',
and,
YES.. actually slavery was a way of life in Rome,
so,
at times when Masters and Slaves converted to Christianity they were advised to treat each other well.
Why?
It THEN EXPLAINS it is because they are EQUALS in Christ.
Now what?
ElProximo 2 years ago
Really you want me to explain your dull holy books to you? Where are the pasages supporting your own position? Why are you forced to defend or obscure other passages? Or does your deity just enjoy being ambiguous?
Where are the passages containing the repudiation of slavery? Or the denouncement of sexism? (Didn't I ask this before??)
So you are making this boastful claim so where is your evidence? How is the deity you believe to be real responsible for morality? -- Isn't this your main point?
DistinctiveBlend 2 years ago
Lets review how dumb you are:
- You think you can just say that the God of the Bible 'supports' slavery, genocide and sexism.
- You think I have to explain to you why your stupid claims are 'not correct'.
- You think I should start from the beginning explaining all the contexts, situations, conditions to all those passages because you are too ignorant and don't know where to even start.
And to the original idea:
- You DON'T have a basis for absolute morality WITHOUT a God.
How could you?
ElProximo 2 years ago
Eh..I provided passages...you rejected them, so you need to explain why you can just reject them and claim the opposite of what they say...
Your third point is merely your attempt to bury and hide by means of context, situation etc... Rather dishonest don't you think?
And I never claimed I did...indeed such a claim is foolish and plainly goes against reality ( I guess that is why you're making it?)
Morality is not absolute otherwise we'd still have slaves and force women against their will.
DistinctiveBlend 2 years ago
Don't wimp out now.
I didn't reject your passages at all.
I want you to tell me how they 'support' slavery, genocide and sexism,
and,
more specifically I want you to really explain the context, the situations, who these passages are for and why etc?
Come on tough guy... lets see you stop being a coward and lets have it?
Stop being a sneaky little coward and trying to pretend we turned it around on me,
hoping to fool readers,
no,
YOU beaked off and now you don't have a clue where to start LOL
ElProximo 2 years ago
Isn't it self explanatory? Your holy books contains commands on how to treat slaves rather than the repudiation of slavery. Even with all it's supposed wisdom and power your deity couldn't remove or prevent slavery in the world... instead it commands on their treatment in endorsement.
As for sexism how about 1 Timothy 2 11-15.. How are you going to attempt to ignore and bury that one?
Now I ask yet again where are the passages supporting your position? Where is the denouncement of slavery?
DistinctiveBlend 2 years ago
No, it is not 'supporting' slavery so you failed on that one.
Keep in mind their slave system was NOT the kind you HOPE makes people have emotional reactions about,
but,
Yes, it is revolutionary and talks to Pagans who converted.
It then declares the slaves as equals.
What more do you want?
In another STUNNING revolutionary statement the same goes to declare men and women are equal in Christ as well.
This passage you cite IS 'repudiation' of inequality by its very declaration!
Woops!
ElProximo 2 years ago
Oh really? So now the slavery isn't the type of slavery where one person owns another? Again how is your holy book giving commands on how to treat slaves not an endorsement of slavery?
Did you even read the passage? I quote "I do not permit a woman to teach or to have authority over a man; she must be silent. 13For Adam was formed first, then Eve."
How can you deny what is evident?
Do you choice not to answer my question because you can't find such a passage? Will you admit projection here?
DistinctiveBlend 2 years ago
Do understand there's a difference between what your holy books say and what you want them to say.... I would hazard that's your problem.
DistinctiveBlend 2 years ago
ElProximo 2 years ago
Thing is "equal in Christ" as you put it, doesn't stop the slave being beaten by his master. It doesn't stop the slave being owned by the master...
I propose it is immoral to own other humans; that slavery is immoral. Something your deity failed to do...
Again with this "in Christ" business.. pity it has no tangible benefit in reality. Yes I do have a problem with that as it's called sexism and I'm against it...again something your deity and yourself seem alright with.
DistinctiveBlend 2 years ago
This is enough for me tonight....why don't you try answering some of my questions while I'm gone?
Answer this "where is the scriptural support of your position?" Do you think you're just projecting what you want to be true onto the scriptures because you're aware of how barbaric they are?
Enjoy the rest of your day/evening,
DB.
DistinctiveBlend 2 years ago
Again - YOU don't make claims for scriptures and then pretend like I am now supposed to 'show you otherwise'.
2000 years of scholars never even came up with those claims but some 'online atheist' makes them then they can show us the reasoning behind them.
and no, I don't have to twist interpretations because I actually understand the context, the theological implications, what was written to who and why and what is 'implied' or not.
YOU DONT.
However..I strongly return your best wishes.
ElProximo 2 years ago
What are you saying ElProximo? Is it that the "word of God" can't be taken by word? Why do you think it needs to be interpreted?
My guess would be because you are aware of how horrid some of it is but you don't want to admit it to yourself?
My complaint was the bible has no denouncement of slavery and other immoral acts, rather it has instructions on how to beat your slave and commands women not to teach etc.
Where is the denouncement of these immoral actions?
DistinctiveBlend 2 years ago
And my original complaint was that with no denouncement (rather we find endorsement) of many acts we civilized humans find horrid and immoral how can you seriously attempt to claim divine morality?
You must be able to see just how pitiful and laughable such a claim is. The deity found in the bible is not the "author of morality".... the idea is ludicrous and best left in the dark, barbaric and gloomy past where it belongs.
DistinctiveBlend 2 years ago
I'd like it if you would stop replying to me. You are not good at this.
At this point you are just making annoying teenager type 'taunt questions' (which are actually bluffs as you don't even know what the answer might be),
and,
You are also making up things and I believe doing so because (like a Hyena) you think its going to frustrate ,me and get me 'spinning in circles' with the repeated ankle nips here,
so,
You may now stfu and go sit down.
Thx
ElProximo 2 years ago
No ground to stand on? Why can't you answer my question?
It was you who started the boastful claims and assertions, I merely called you on it.
Surely alarm bells must sound in your head when even the most devout of believers can't take their deity by its own supposed word.
DistinctiveBlend 2 years ago
Oh and if I'm not good at this then why are you throwing out insults and running away?
DistinctiveBlend 2 years ago
ElProximo 2 years ago
well i can speak for me as an atheist, i am not a humanitarian i dont help anyone but me and my own, i am the predatory superior creature that evolution made me. fuckall supposed "morality"! especially the pathetic humanitarian morality that so many atheist embrace.
bearshaman0 2 years ago
This guys is a preacher. There are no objective morals. No natural causal effect event can be proven to be moral. So when he says we get them from the same place what he means is they come from beliefs about causal effect events.
I help you/you help me is a philosophical stance.
I take from you and help myself is another.
There are many variations.
It's all belief. How you look at something will determine what you see.
Twicebakedtaters 2 years ago
interesting... your arguement still reflects Christian values and Biblical philosophy. It's kind of hard to escape from it ...
zoarXgold 2 years ago
you've got it backwards.
chronicbudha 2 years ago
i probably do. I'm still contemplating it...
zoarXgold 2 years ago
Correct Answer:
- You borrow your morals from the theists around you. Things are just fine as long as you continue borrowing Christian morals from the society around you.
- If you were in a predominantly Nazi culture you would borrow from those.
- From a strictly atheistic world view using your rules, it would help you and others (who can help you) to gas severely retarded, mentally insane, comatose etc.
Which they did in Nazi Germany and which you have NO right to call 'wrong'.
Right?
ElProximo 2 years ago
@ElProximo no we fucking evolved morals look at the bible if u call i moral u are more worthless than ecoli and less moral than my python
patrickledford420 2 years ago
Atheists get their moral values from socity. If you do something bad people hat you for it so you don't do it. And the people who comit crime are either desprite or screwed up in the head.
THEWHIPX1 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
.
If this webpage has a designer, who designed your brain? The fool has said There is no God (Psalm 14:1)
but I say unto you, that every one who shall say to his brother, Thou fool, shall be in danger of the hell of fire. (Mat.5:22) who are my brethren? whosoever shall do the will of my Father in heaven, he is my brother (Mat.12:48-50) but the fool has said there is no God
.
conceil8 2 years ago
who is he crappin he believes in God!
JohnnyBGood11 2 years ago
yes it would, if everyone truly followed their religion or belief 100%. but most people in America are christians, that means more christians have a chance to get into prison. so if atheists completely followed their beliefs and christians theirs it would be different. but christians we speak of in prisons don't have enough morals, or just don't follow them. that means that even though you might be called a christians doesn't mean you follow your morals.
kevinsfrocs 2 years ago
so according to social contract, wouldn't people try to find loopholes in this system? lets say a random person walking on the beach sees a really expensive phone on someone's unoccupied towel. If that person is an atheist and takes the phone they will have found a way to get away with stealing without a consequence. there's no way for someone to find them if no one saw them. so if this example worked in a grander scale wouldn't atheism be the cause of many bad things happening?
kevinsfrocs 2 years ago
people that try to find loopholes in the system are usually referred to as " criminals ". Seeing as that over 90% of jailed criminals are theistic, I think that kind of blows your little hypothesis out of the water wouldn't you ?
chronicbudha 2 years ago
inteligent video
HadesUnbound 2 years ago 9
like people haven't found loopholes in the written word?? being the bible or any other book!...please stop trying to apologize for religion... where in the bible does it say you can't take a cell found you "found" on the beach?...it does say that if i repent, i will be pardoned, so acording to the beble i can take it as long as i feel bad about it...AND i can thank the lord for having "blessed" me with this find, just like your pastor does when he opens envelopes every sunday after church.
oiram71317 2 years ago
according to our belief, there are no loopholes, its called sin. Its stated in the ten commandments that its stealing what is not yours. and yea you can repent, but only if you mean it. otherwise you're just cheating God with a lie. in the end you're just fooling the priest. I disagree with the way priests are paid also, and thats not stated in the bible. plus, the bible has already been proven false scientifically, now look at it from a moral point of view....
kevinsfrocs 2 years ago
forget about the whole God's existence and being saved after death. don't you think the morals that are spoken of in the bible(excluding worshiping God) are actually the best choice for a world like ours? Is it really that important to cancel out religion when its actually thought of by many intelligent people(the founding fathers for example) to be a great set of rules to establish order in a chaotic civilization? do you agree or disagree?
kevinsfrocs 2 years ago
i will agree that the bible can be ONE OF MANY sources of morality. but do you want to kill kids for not listening to their parents? or what do you want to do to a gay person?..today, i understand that wiccan does not equal evil. but the bible will tell you kill them too along with anybody not following the hebrew god....no in general, i rather not take ALL of my morality from this source. how does a wolf know not eat its young? or another wolf's young for that matter?
oiram71317 2 years ago
We animals do not need the bible to know right from wrong,,,look at the many tribes that do not need the bible to have an existance...
oiram71317 2 years ago
anyway, this video is aimed at claims that without god there can be no morals,,,totally bogus claim
oiram71317 2 years ago
you are correct with the problems the bible has. I don't know why i used the word bible to define my interpretation of good morality. The bible is an interpretation by us humans. I would like to revise my answer to change it to, instead of the bible, Christianity. the morals that are spoken of, and only by, Jesus Christ. I believe that the words that came from him and nobody else is the greatest source of good morality.
kevinsfrocs 2 years ago
i would certainly say that i live by "do unto others" but the problem again is interpretation..to some people the important thing are the miracles, to others the important thing is the act of comunion and yet others want to kill jews for killing the christ (i am aware he did not teach this)...my point is that if jesus did not mention something specifically then people put words into his mouth...then there are those that say he condoned slavery! is this true?..(i have not seen this in the bible).
oiram71317 2 years ago
I am pretty sure he did not say such a thing, but I'm a little confused about your response. can you go into further detail? What do you mean by "mention something specifically". Do you mean that if he didn't say not to do it, then its not breaking the rules? im not sure what you mean.
kevinsfrocs 2 years ago
exactly that some say that some old testament rules still apply because he did not mention them by name....also about condoning slavery i have heard that itis in the bible but never seen