h2g2 The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy: Earth Edition

<>

Any evidence for objective good or evil?

<>

Never the easy questions, hey? Well, not a lot, except that there's pretty much universal (in the sense of world-wide, really) agreement about which acts constitute good and which evil.

Murder, rape, robbery, fraud, cheating on one's partner, - bad.

Giving to those in need, giving friendship and support to friends and family, welcoming strangers, good.

Of course it's the shades of grey where it gets hairy... and the that's not to mention the whole unintended consequences thing.

But some things, an irreducible minimum of things are pretty clear.

Vicky

<>

The rest is kinda extraneous, eh?

<>

NO, sorry, I can't agree!

Vicky.

It's nice to see some of the theists having a converstion here.

I'm sure most of you have seen some of the non-theists here outline their reasons for saying that religion offers nothing to morality. Do you have any response?

Gif

I find that really scary! And it is absolutely alien to my personal experience. From my memory, from childhood I've always had a quite joyful urge to be helpful to others, to try to spread happiness, to help out those less fortunate than me and to try to feel satisfied with having what I need and not striving to aquire what I don't need. I've never felt a need for any supernatural guidence and, frankly, I find that need absolutely incomprehensible. When described as it sounds like a pathology to me. Now, if religion has put a positive control on that problem, religion certainly seems to be a positive in this case.

<>

It was.

<>

It is!

Mikey

What I find the most frightening is that there are, one would assume, people out there who have no moral sense. You say that in your case it was scary for you, but, I find it frightening for the rest of us, we who go through life quite comfortable assuming that those around us have an innate moral sense like we do, but, in fact, there are wolves among us. While religion seems to have a positive effect sometimes on those without a moral sense, I would be more comfortable if a more reliable treatment were found.

If I'm understanding you correctly, Michael, what you are describing is the old suggestion that without religion to provide morality, we would all go about killing, robbing and raping. I've never had a religion to give me morality, and I've never felt any temptation to do any evils of that sort. What is the difference between you before religion, when you lacked that moral sense, and me?

Hi Gif

Religion is a very broad term. Its easy to think of examples of people who've used the cloak of religion to do things that are frankly 'evil'.

My own experience is one of finding in Christ an acceptance and unconditional love which, I am discovering, is setting me free to love other people.

I try to live a very moral life because I am concious of how lust can lead to sexual immorality, and anger can lead to murder, when these natural human tendencies are allowed free reign in our personalities.

I personally believe that where the fear of God is removed from humans, there is no depth to which they might not stoop. This claim gains some credence when current newspapers are studied. I am not passing judgement on non-religious people here...far from it...I've tried to humble myself by describing my own moral weakness as an example.

I am no scholar in matters of morality, although I do like to observe what makes people tick, both in my circle of acquaintances and in the media. I'm really only offering my own experience as an example here to contradict the notion that all religious experience is somehow suspect.

Mikey2

Hi Mikey,

OK, we're both agreed that we can probably find examples of immoral acts committed by both theists and atheists. And I'm pretty sure you'd agree that we can also find examples of very moral acts performed by both theists and atheists. We're obviously not going to deepen our understanding of morality by trading examples of 'the other lot' behaving immorally - we need to find *why* people act morally.

What I don't understand is you saying that before you found religion, there was nothing in you stopping anger leading to murder. I think trunt is asking the same thing - surely there was something stopping you? I mean, I take it you didn't murder anyone before you started believing in God?

So surely you - like trunt and me - did have a moral sense? And don't you use that moral sense to tell you which of the Biblical commandments should still be followed and which should not?

You also said 'one of the important reasons for becoming a christian was a deep sense of my own propensity towards doing bad things' - surely if you recognised them as 'bad things' before making the decision to become a Christian, you did already have a moral sense before you became a Christian?

So it seems to me that non-believers (including the old you) do have a moral sense, and I'm puzzled by what religion brings to this.

Gif

PS: Use of the 'Preview' function has just prevented me asking some searching questions about the morality of Christina, which would have sounded rather different

http://www.economist.com/science/displaystory.cfm?story_id=10903480

Interesting article about the social-bonding effects of religion (as measured in the lab).

Hi Pedro,

I would title the article as The attempt of some religious people to prove the relevance of religion in order to promote morality in societies , using (not convincingly) a scientific method.

They say "... a sense of being watched by a supernatural being might be useful" (...) "... made people less likely to cheat" (...)

the best one: being religious "...made people desirable as mates"
Are they thinking of this video?

http://es.youtube.com/watch?v=hRdVg_JATII

A translation just in case:
I love Laura, but I´ll wait until marriage/ Amo a laura pero esperaré hasta el matrimonio
I´m not going to grab that flower, I wont be who destroy it/ No voy a arrancar esa flor,no seré yo quien la destruya/...
and so on.
and I know that many religious people laught at that video, others were charmed with it and felt offended when it was known that it was a joke of the MTV to promote itself.

Hi Mar

What I took from that article (I read it about 2 weeks ago, so I'm a bit hazy on the details) is that religion promotes group cohesion. Obviously when there is competition between groups, as there has been throughout human history, then that gives societies which are religious an advantage over societies which aren't. Finally, a use for religion!

The studies quoted don't make any comment on whether religious woo-woo nonsense is actually real or not (inventing a ghost might give a clue though), which is good IMO.

What we're left with is evidence for groups working towards common aims a wee bit better if they believe in gods. Ho-hum. I'd like to see it compared with an army mentality after the indoctrination into the forces ethos. I'd imagine that works in a similar way, and probably with the same efficacy.

In general I'm trying to stay away from these type of threads. But I can't let what Mikey has said pass without comment. I also find it quite disturbing that someone may think you can only want to fundamentally love and care for your fellows because of fear of god, . I find that quite incomprehensible and sinister. Although he has said that is *his* situation. Mine couldn't be more diametrically opposed.

Despite fits of anger in the heat of the moment. My overwhelming desire is to care and love for others. It has *never* come from any faith in god thing; and I'm so glad it doesn't. It has *always* been an instinctive feeling from my HEART. If I do a hurtful thing to others, I feel bad because I don't like hurting people, it upsets me. It has nothing whatsoever to do with any sort of faith thing. And it *never* will have I'm absolutely 100% certain. It's just about fundamentally loving others from my heart.

><I personally believe that where the fear of God is removed from humans, there is no depth to which they might not stoop.<< Mikey

I found this phrase of Mikey's really disturbing and upsetting. I'm amazed that someone would have such an appalling view of humanity. It is certainly not my experience from the non believers I know.

Fear of God doesn't seem like any sort of a reason not to hurt others that I can fathom. It sounds so calculating.

An *instinctive loving heart* seems a much better reason. Because it makes someone feel good to love others. Yes I find what Mikey is saying really freaks me out, and hurts and upsets me. Nothing anyone could say would make me want to run away from belief in god, more than that.

I really must keep away from here again, or I'll be having horrible nightmares.

I agree, Effers.

I find the comments I noted and now the ones you note as very, very disturbing.



to rephrase, without, I think, removing the meaning:



Now substitute any religious or ethnic group you choose for and see how people react.

But never mind the bigotry of the statement: it strikes me that such a statement is a comment on the speaker's own suspicions of the depths of evil to which he himself might stoop, and *that* is the most frightening thing -- that someone can have no restraint on their behavior except the fear of a god they've been told about.

Perplexing, terrifying, and wholly alien to my own experience of self and others in general (although, I must add that my experience of the small subset of humanity called has too often been expressions similar to Mikey's) .

Oh, but the _nice_ atheists really _know_ God exists. They just refuse to acknowledge Him, or mistakenly blame Him for their misfortune, which all issues from their own misdeeds - the fuit of their sins!!!!

Apart from _hating_ God, many atheists are quite moral, because deep in their hearts the _divine spark_ prods their souls towards God-inspired good and moral behaviour, even though they may be unwilling to admit the obvious existence of souls

Truely evil people are those who are possessed by the Evil One
Such as those truly are fallen

We shall pray for them



Ramen

Yes, fuit. Third person, singular, perfect, indicative, active of the Latin verb to be, exist, live.

Yes, atheists' misfortunes are the *have been* of their sins.

>>I am a christian believer. As my memory serves me, one of the important reasons for becoming a christian was a deep sense of my own propensity towards doing bad things...a desperate sense of an absence of personal moral goodness. In Christ I found a way out of this predicament

My attitude to that is...well, if it worked for you, then good. *However* some have morality without religion. This clearly doesn't square with the Christian teaching of 'Nobody shall enter the kingdom of heaven save through me.'

Plus...I'm afraid that personal experiences do not, I'm afraid, equate to universal truths. I know of many people who have turned there lives around without religion.

But as I say...if it works for you.

>>By morality...are we discussing the deeper implications of the existence of good and evil in the human heart. I feel two quite distinct principles at work within me. Does anyone else here feel the same?

I think we can easily think about this in non-religious terms. It's unhelpful to think of Good an Evil has entities as of themselves, possibly originating outside the person, possibly competing to control. the person. (Is this what you imply, micky1, or am I making assumptions?) People make choices. Sometimes bad choices are made and their consequences ignored. Sometimes the choices are good. Sometimes people have difficulty deciding; they are conflicted. This is a far more sensible and practical way to thing about these human struggles. It means that we can adjust our thinking and lead our lives in good and useful directions. Nobody else can do this for us - not even Jesus.

"fRuit" even

Now don't all fall off your chairs, but...I have to say that I somewhat agree with Vicky on:

<>

>>Murder, rape, robbery, fraud, cheating on one's partner, - bad.

I agree that there are some things which are pretty damned universal amongs humans. I guess my quibble would be with pedro's word 'objective'. I can't see what meaning it has in Ethics. We find those behaviours displeasing which cause subjective unhappiness. Because all humans are broadly similar, we tend to dislike the same behaviours.

Clearly we can't think of 'Good' and 'Evil' as Absolutes in the same way that we can physical or mathematical truths. But in the limited universe of human experience...we might as well treat some things as though they are universal. Some truths we hold to be self-evident.