Religion is one of the “justifications” of morality, meaning that it offers a framework in which certain people are more likely to follow moral rules than without it. I, for one, being an atheist (read skeptic) I think morality can exist outside that framework (i.e. Religion), and that moral atheists prove it.
In this thread, I invite theists, atheists, agnostics and apatheists (is there more?) alike, to explain their WHY of morality. What are the most important moral rules they follow (or try to), and why they do it? It would be interesting to see, how different people might see common rules, like “Do not kill”, for example.
Also, try not to ridicule the other’s explanations/justifications. I hope that a civil discussion could help us learn about how “the others” think.
A.
[edit: the invitation is for everybody] [edit: thread title. I mean this to be mainly about individual beliefs/values, not about the philosophical concept or morality.
[ December 16, 2007, 05:15 PM: Message edited by: suminonA ]
Posted by JonHecht (Member # 9712) on :
Concerning morality from God, lemme steal something from Socrates. Is something moral, because god says it is, or does got say to do it, because it is moral. This is under the assumption that God exists, just because I think it is a fun paradox.
Then blah blah, natural laws, deontology, consequentialism, virtue ethics, etc.
Posted by Tatiana (Member # 6776) on :
Morality exists independently of God. He counsels us to act morally, he doesn't decree or invent morality. And that answers the first post too. Of course atheists can be moral and usually are moral.
The reason why in both cases is this. It greatly increases our happiness to act morally. Particularly if everyone acts morally. That's the basis for society and if we lose that, we'll go back to small kinship groups constantly warring between themselves. It's a terrible way to live. Civilization is much better, and civilization depends on people acting morally.
Posted by JonHecht (Member # 9712) on :
So I take it that you are a proponent of Hobbes?
Posted by Tatiana (Member # 6776) on :
Yes, I love stuffed tigers.
Posted by suminonA (Member # 8757) on :
JonHecht, why are you moral? What does it mean for you to act morally?
A.
Posted by JonHecht (Member # 9712) on :
Who says that I'm not a moral nihilist?
Edit: I've read a lot about morality, but plan to go more in depth now that it is winter break, and I have time. I'll get back to you. :-D
Posted by suminonA (Member # 8757) on :
So, you think that your reasons to be moral (or not) will change over the winter break?
A.
Posted by JonHecht (Member # 9712) on :
I doubt it, but my understanding will.
Posted by Foust (Member # 3043) on :
Moral rules are for the weak, and I do mean that. Morality is founded on resentment.
That doesn't mean one drifts into some sort of brutal social Darwinism, because social Darwinism is its own kind of morality.
If you have to ask about how to live your life, the only real answer is "become what you are."
Posted by Chris Bridges (Member # 1138) on :
"There is satisfaction in making the world a better place, there is joy in making others happy, there is peace in making others comforted, there is strength in integrity, and there is confidence that comes from never doing anything you would be ashamed to admit to."
Posted by Lisa (Member # 8384) on :
An it harm none, do as ye will.
I know that's a pagan phraseology, but it's pretty much the same as Hillel's "What is hateful to you, do not do to your fellow."
When I was a kid, my Dad used to tell me, "You can do anything you want, so long as you don't hurt anyone".
When I was a teenager, I read Time Enough for Love, and this quote from Lazarus Long impressed me enough that I tried (unsuccessfully) to use it as my senior quote in high school:
quote:Sin lies only in hurting other people unnecessarily. All other "sins" are invented nonsense. Hurting yourself isn't sinful -- just stupid.
And when I got older, I read Ayn Rand saying that the initiation of coercive force against anyone is immoral (as opposed to retaliatory force).
Only people with an essentially solipsistic world view can think that there's any essential difference between them and other people in terms of what's proper. If it's okay for me to steal, then it's equally okay for others to steal from me. To say that might makes right is short-sighted in the extreme, because no one stays mighty forever.
Moral rules are for the sane. Morality is founded on a rational assessment of reality. Contrary to what Foust says, the weak are in no position to force moral rules on the strong. It's only the strong who've ever been able to push a moral agenda. And it's shameful that not everyone has done so.
Posted by Foust (Member # 3043) on :
I'm pretty sure I didn't say that the weak force moral rules on the strong. That sentence doesn't even make sense.
I'm saying that morality is about needing other people to build your world for you. "You're not doing X, and you are doing Y, so I can't be happy. Sob sob, whine whine."
Kind of like "You're not producing goods, and you are sacrificing for others, therefore I'm going to run off and found my own little utopia, eventually subjecting you to a 50 page speech about how awesome I am."
Posted by JonHecht (Member # 9712) on :
As much as I disagree with your sentiment....
"Kind of like "You're not producing goods, and you are sacrificing for others, therefore I'm going to run off and found my own little utopia, eventually subjecting you to a 50 page speech about how awesome I am.""
That is awesome.
Posted by Miro (Member # 1178) on :
quote:Originally posted by Chris Bridges: "There is satisfaction in making the world a better place, there is joy in making others happy, there is peace in making others comforted, there is strength in integrity, and there is confidence that comes from never doing anything you would be ashamed to admit to."
Are you quoting someone, Chris? My Google-fu is failing me.
Posted by Chris Bridges (Member # 1138) on :
Me, actually, from my own landmark thread four years ago. Seemed easier than retyping it. Posted by cmc (Member # 9549) on :
Coming off going to church for the second time today (the music this morning left my ears hurting and i knew they have kick-ass, wait - can i say that about church? ; ), music sunday nights)... I'm going to write a response to A.'s question. I'm not sure why I'm venturing to write a response - I'm not going to ask, I'm just going to do.
quote: What are the most important moral rules they follow (or try to), and why they do it?
I'll start off by giving a little back-ground about my religious, spiritual, divine, whatever you want to call it upbringing and life. I was baptized Catholic when I was a baby - you know, wash away all that original sin type stuff. I went to Sunday School every year (and somehow it became Tuesday night school or whatever day of the week my grade fit, and my Mom taught a class, too, so I'd go to their stuff too). I tried out Catholic school for about a day in 3rd grade - I was too outspoken for the mean woman's liking and, well, I lasted about a day. I'm a naturally curious person and as such don't settle for what's right in front of me. Sure - Catholicism is great and all... but there are all these other people in this monstrous world who believe other things!!! What is it they believe, what makes them believe that, is it really different, is it just the same thing with a little different terminology? Meaning... is it sage green as opposed to forrest as opposed to grass? For a while I decided I wasn't going to do the whole religion thing. Too stressful, people fight about it too much, people actually kill each other over it. That's when I got the "UNTIL THEY HAVE THE CHURCH OF (insert my name here) YOU'RE GOING TO CATHOLIC CHURCH" tirade from my Mom. (even though i was really pissed at her at the time, i appreciate some of my mom's tirades... that one in particular) At that point, I reaffirmed my decision to learn about other people's beliefs. That was, I think, junior year of High School - a year after I'd Confirmed.
Truth be told, I had a discussion last Friday night with my Mom that fits in to this answer a little. When I 'research' religion or beliefs or even non-beliefs, I don't really like to just sit and read a book about what it's supposed to be. I like to ask a person who identifies themselves as a member of a particular group what being a part of that group means to them. Things sound great on paper, things are wonderful in theory - I like to see how they actually work. So I ask people how they internalize, live, what they believe. Maybe that seems dumb to some people - it makes more sense to me to ask people living NOW what their faith means to them. That's what I do, if you don't like it - don't do it that way. That's the cool thing about living... you can do what you want. Free will's pretty cool, huh? Dangerous and cool all at the same time. ; )
So - there's a quick background. Raised Catholic, ever Curious.
To get back to the question at hand...
quote: What are the most important moral rules they follow (or try to), and why they do it?
Most important rules, huh? I'll do a list, with the whys right there.
* The Golden Rule is in effect in my life, big time. Do unto others as you would have them do unto you. Why? It feels good. Is it hard sometimes? Yes. Do I sometimes want to toss that rule out the window, take two steps forward and throttle the neck of the person who's talking 16 times too loud on their cell phone so that I can't even concentrate on my thought and I find myself wondering, why did Jessie say she'd be home by nine and then not even call to say she'd be late... ? Yes. Do I do it? No. I settle for a glare their way and a quick reminder to myself not to talk loud when I'm on the phone in public. Why don't I do it? Because I'd be pretty furious if some random walked up to me and started throttling my neck. Just an example, hopefully it conveys what I mean.
* Don't waste your time with jealousy. Why? It'll eat you up inside. So the neighbor just bought a sweet new car, you're pissed you've still got the clunker you bought 7 years ago. You walk inside and mumble/mutter about how they're always showing off blah blah blah. Stupid. A better thing to do, in my eyes, is to walk next door and say something like... 'DUDE! Sweet new car! Let's go for a ride!' The benefits are, at least, twofold... you get to bond with the neighbor (almost always a plus) AND you get to ride in said sweet new car without having the new car payment OR higher insurance payment! Oh - that girl in your chemistry class is way prettier than the girl you see in the mirror? So... you walk to your locker after class with your buddy and talk crap about how she thinks she's so pretty and she's too cool to talk to anyone 'cause she thinks she's better than them. Stupid. A better thing to do, in my eyes, is to walk up to her with your buddy and say something like... 'DUDE! Did you know that your nose/eyes/mouth/cheeks/whatever catches your eyes the most is/are, like, SO cute/colorful/heart-shaped/pinch-able/whatever it is that caught your eye in the first place? That must suck for you...' then laugh. The benefits are, at least, twofold... You get to bond with the girl in your chemistry class (who might end up being the #1 person you call on in a jam 15 years down the road) and the next time you look in the mirror - that girl in there might be more pleasing to your eyes than the last time you looked.
* Give back more than you get and do it cheerfully. Why? What goes around comes around. There's got to be a reason why you got what you got. At the same time, I find it hard to believe the 'right' thing for you to do is hoard it all for yourself. What fun is that? Gee - I have all these wonderful leaves that I just raked in to a great big pile. I think I'll just jump into them all by myself, while all the neighborhood children watch. No - I won't let them jump with me, even though my pile of leaves reaches the first floor of my house and most of the leaves are from their trees anyway. Stupid. Much more fun to jump in with everyone - and then start throwing leaves at each other, stuffing them down someone's shirt, grinding them into someone's hair... Sharing is caring, folks.
* Don't forget to say THANK YOU for all that you do have. Why? Ungrateful is ugly, in oh so many ways. Don't be greedy, either, 'cause that's ugly, too. If you have 5 fingers, be glad and grateful for them. Please don't go asking for 6. It will throw the great cosmic forces all off kilter...
* Talk about what you believe. Every chance you get. Ask people about what they believe. Every chance you get. Why? Because it's cool. Because it's interesting. Because it's not something that has to be all secretive and hidden. If you believe it, talk about it. What good is believing something if you aren't willing to share your belief of it? That's like... hmmm... that's like finding the cure for cancer and keeping it locked up in your safe because you might need it someday. Stupid. Share it and who knows - it could become the cure for everything else in the world. (pretty bad analogy... hopefully my point comes across)
I think that's about all I've got for right now. That's about 30 minutes worth of thought. I'm hesitant to post it, because I don't know how it will be received and I don't know if I'll be able to keep up with any potential ripping apart (as sometimes happens here) of the thoughts expressed. I'll try to answer any questions or respond to any disagreement of thoughts I've shared. Be patient with me, though, I'm still a work in progress.
: )
~cmc
Posted by advice for robots (Member # 2544) on :
Working so that you and those you influence can continue to exercise your freedom of choice to its fullest extent. I would call that highly moral.
Letting your love for your fellow human beings motivate your actions.
Posted by pooka (Member # 5003) on :
Well, the core of meta-cognition, which I haven't really evaluated recently, was basically that I should treat other people as if they were people. I can't really treat them the way I want to be treated, because what I want is intimately connected with my identity and experience, so if I were to treat them like myself, I would be denying their personhood.
Like I said, I'm not sure if I am buying it at this time in my life.
Posted by Irami Osei-Frimpong (Member # 2229) on :
quote:"You can do anything you want, so long as you don't hurt anyone."
Somewhere there is a Good Samaritan crying.
Posted by suminonA (Member # 8757) on :
First, let me thank all those that share their ideas here. A special thanks for cmc, who took her time to go into detail.
cmc, I personally think your way of approaching “morality” is beautiful. There might be particular points where we would disagree, but it is obvious to me that you thought about those things and reached your conclusions. Plus, sharing IS the point of communication.
Of course, it’s time I responded here to my own questions, isn’t it?
I don’t know if my background needs repeating, but in any case, here it is: I grew up in a religious society, my family being Orthodox Christian. I had a lot of questions about this “religion thing”, but I was generally treated as someone who has to know and follow the rules, not having any use of understanding them. I’m not blaming anybody, I’m just saying that so many subjects (and explanations) were taboo that I had to finally give up. The overall result was that, the more they were trying to convince me, the less they succeeded.
Then, I grew up and met many other people, inside different societies (read countries), with many different ideologies, and it was a great opportunity to understand more about the world around me, especially in terms of morality.
So, at some point I came to evaluate my own morality, and came to the conclusion that I can be moral, without any “divine guilt” hanging above me. I am a self declared atheist, and I take responsibility for it in case any deity out there is planning my eternal damnation because of it.
Now, for my “morality”:
The overall rule was and still is something close to the Golden Rule, that thing about treating others the way you’d like them to treat you. But, I soon found out that there are more types of people around, and that they don’t necessarily like the same things that I do. Take the masochists, for example. I won’t accept them to treat me the way they want me to treat them, just like that. There is one more level that needs to be defined. That is: Don’t expect anyone to please you, if you’re not willing to please them. With that, I can be mean to a masochist if that brings them pleasure, but I want in return to be treated the way I like it, not the way they like it for them. I hope that makes sense. (One conclusion being: don’t judge people before knowing them. And I’d add: don’t judge people after knowing them either.)
Also, I soon realized that all my actions (my words being a subset) affect other people, whether I like it or not. You know the saying: “Hell is paved with good intentions” ? I don’t believe in such a place, but I do get the meaning. Add to that the fact that whenever I’m among joyful people, I’m joyful too, and when I’m among sad /angry people I tend to get sad too.
You’ll see then why I like to bring joy and smiles to others. Because that makes me happy too. You might see that as selfish, but I prefer that happiness rather than any other material wealth that I can call “mine”. That’s the core of my morality.
Why do I follow the rules like “Do not kill”? Well, because killing someone who wants to live is utterly horrendous, because it generally generates a level of fear in that person that I’d rather never experience. What if a person wants to die? There is where the line gets blurry and I hope never to have to answer to such an extreme situation.
Why “not steal”? Simply because every time someone steals something, they steal it from someone else. Trivial, but as I don’t like to be in the second position, I don’t want to cause anybody to be in that position. (Unless they want it, and take pleasure being in it)
Why love and not hate? Because generally love brings joy; hate brings sadness and anger. (Not an absolute, therefore not a simple way to answer this. The full explanation might take another full thread)
Another moral concern for me is education. What good is it to know something (be it about moral codes or quantum mechanics) if we don’t share it with the rest of the Universe? Again, trivial, but several threads here demonstrate that not everybody understands the same way the concepts of “teaching”, “sharing”, “indoctrinating” and the like.
I think it’s immoral not to educate the ones that might learn things from you. But it’s more immoral to force them to learn something they don’t want to know, or to “trick” them into learning only what you want them to know.
Knowing things and understanding the “way they work” brings me utter joy and I try to share that joy with all interested.
A.
Posted by Eduardo St. Elmo (Member # 9566) on :
While I do think the Golden Rule is a good compass for the path of moral choices, it leaves something to be desired, since it doesn't address the option of other people wanting things you do not want. I still don't have a rigid definition for my own moral code - but the following is the closest I can come to it in words:
"Never force others to join in your game"
Of course the word game is used here in its broadest definition, meant to cover anything from getting ink done to fasting because of your religious beliefs... Basically any action you undertake as a person, from the most banal to the most spiritual. Honesty bids me to say that I have broken this rule on several occasions. But since some of these events took place before I had fully constructed the 'code', the burden of guilt is lessened somewhat.
Posted by Sterling (Member # 8096) on :
Try to treat others with respect, unless and until they prove they don't deserve that respect. Others as in individuals. Failure of such a basic tenant justifies prejudice and genocide, instigates and prolongs conflicts from the indivdual level to the level of war.
Ask questions, and be cautious of answers that come too easily. Don't go into a question presupposing the answer, and be careful of questions whose answers will do no one good.
("When we were together, did you ever cheat on me?")
Do not accept everything you hear as gospel, but listen.
It's late, and I'm sure I'm not firing on all cylinders, but that's a start.
Posted by sylvrdragon (Member # 3332) on :
To quote my own Myspace description:
quote:I act out of intelligent self-interest. Which is to say that I don't believe in "Conscience" or "Morals", but rather in reason, and logic. The reason I don't commit crimes or drink or do drugs is because the consequences (and probability of me facing them) are generally higher than the potential gain of said actions. This is also the reason that I'm generally considered to be a "nice guy". I treat people well and help them out because I know logically that making enemies of them will hurt me in the long run. Karma is not some mystical force, but is rational probability.
As such, my definition of "Right" and "Wrong" is subject to change as I gain information and perspective. Someday, when I have children and a wife, then I'll likely extend this philosophy to include them into "myself", and so, I'll make decisions based on what's best for ALL of us, rather than just me.
Of course, this is how I perceive EVERYONE'S morality to function on the deepest level. I believe that everyone's actions are justified in their own mind. Everything is calculated to net a gain on some level. Acts of charity are calculated to achieve some level of community status. Martyrs likely wouldn't be martyrs if they didn't believe that they would be rewarded in some form of afterlife. Even anonymous acts of charity can be said to have a gain; that being described by biochemistry and the chemicals sent through the brain when you think you've accomplished something. etc.
The actions we see where we can't perceive of any gain at all are usually a result of not enough information when the calculation was made.
This is pretty much just reiterating the "There's no such thing as a selfless act" theory that many here have probably heard before. I'll admit that it's a pretty depressing version of reality to live in; where it's hard to take people's actions at face value, but once I came to believe it, its very difficult to convince myself that this isn't the case Posted by suminonA (Member # 8757) on :
quote:Originally posted by sylvrdragon: […]
The actions we see where we can't perceive of any gain at all are usually a result of not enough information when the calculation was made.
This is pretty much just reiterating the "There's no such thing as a selfless act" theory that many here have probably heard before. I'll admit that it's a pretty depressing version of reality to live in; where it's hard to take people's actions at face value, but once I came to believe it, its very difficult to convince myself that this isn't the case
Well, I also think that “at face value” it is a quite pessimist way of seeing the world.
Yet, when someone feels joy as they willingly produce joy in others, and they admit it, there is a “clearly selfish” act going on (by your view). But the question is, does this “selfish” act diminish the joy in the world? Is it “bad” in any way? Or do you think it is impossible?
A.
Posted by Teshi (Member # 5024) on :
quote:"There is satisfaction in making the world a better place, there is joy in making others happy, there is peace in making others comforted, there is strength in integrity, and there is confidence that comes from never doing anything you would be ashamed to admit to."
^ This rings true with me.
quote:Of course, this is how I perceive EVERYONE'S morality to function on the deepest level. I believe that everyone's actions are justified in their own mind. Everything is calculated to net a gain on some level. Acts of charity are calculated to achieve some level of community status.
As much as I believe that this is often true, even if done largely unconciously, it is a poor way of looking at the reason for kind acts, because as anyone who has ever tried to be kind knows, the rewards are not always
I think that morality does exist and the reason that many of us act kindly may partially be for exterior rewards (people liking you) and internal rewards (feeling good about yourself) but also because we feel a strong compulsion to be kind to others that is not entirely linked to how we feel about what we do- guilt, for example. Guilt exists because if we do nothing when we could have done something, we feel a sense of error and regret which we call guilt. But we feel guilt because we know we should have done something, regardless of how it would have affected us, regardless of whether it would have been an anonymous action or not, regardless if it would have given us anything. (Except, I suppose the erasure of guilt, but I do not think we act to avoid guilt. I think we experience guilt because we know what we should have done).
What keeps coming to mind is, ahem, an episode of Firefly 'The Train Job' when Mal responds to someone's comment about making a choice about a moral moment, "I don't believe he has [a choice]."
I think that many of us know what we should be doing given the needs of those around us, or at least we are partially aware of what we should be doing and given that awareness of both possible choices, we are most of us able to recognise which choice is the 'only one' as Mal might say.
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
![[Frown]](frown.gif)