Happy Atheist Forum

I'm taking it on my arrogant self to start another thread regarding behavior  (oh no!!!!)  But I'm trying to limit it just to ethics rather than morals to keep commentary of a religious nature out of the picture, please.  john31 started a thread with a good, simple question of whether we need some kind of code of behavior. So how about a vote?

No. Atheism provides freedom to think and judge for ones self.

Since there is no system of values attached to being an atheist, I don't see how atheism itself is a good thing to base an ethical system on.  There are, however, many philosophical views most atheists use to determine proper behavior.

Sorry, I marked "no" but I probably shouldn't have answered. Cancel one of those votes when you compare the statistics on it.

My answer is no. Why make such a social pizza?

Quote from: "Sophus"No. Atheism provides freedom to think and judge for ones self.

Agreed 100%

Kyu

Quote from: "Sophus"No. Atheism provides freedom to think and judge for ones self.

Agreed.

I define my system of morality by how i like to be treated. I try to keep it simple. If it makes me feel good, i should try to do the same with others.

Quote from: "karadan"

Quote from: "Sophus"No. Atheism provides freedom to think and judge for ones self.

I define my system of morality by how i like to be treated. I try to keep it simple. If it makes me feel good, i should try to do the same with others.

I don't think you do  :)

This could get long & messy  

Kyu

Quote from: "Kyuuketsuki"

Quote from: "karadan"

Quote from: "Sophus"No. Atheism provides freedom to think and judge for ones self.

I define my system of morality by how i like to be treated. I try to keep it simple. If it makes me feel good, i should try to do the same with others.

I don't think you do  :)

This could get long & messy  

Kyu

Of course it was learned. I believe i was brought up right so that my moral compass was pointing in the right direction. I certainly wasn't born thinking that. That doesn't stop the fact that it still makes up my personal moral standard.

I think you may be confusing instrumental moral value with intrinsic moral value.

Besides, i don't really want to get into a scemantic argument over this. I was merely pointing out how i live my life. It isn't really something which deserves academic scrutiny.

Picking one set of morals would be like declaring yourself a Democrat or Republican.  Although you may not agree with everything on your party's platform, you are still labeled and it is assumed you follow their respective creeds.

Like many have said before, atheism is not defined by morals or lack of them.  It simply means you believe there is no god.

Quote from: "DennisK"Picking one set of morals would be like declaring yourself a Democrat or Republican.

Not really. It would be quite pointless though.

Quote from: "DennisK"Although you may not agree with everything on your party's platform, you are still labeled and it is assumed you follow their respective creeds.

I disagree. Me siding with a political party implies that I agree with their major points, that's it.

Quote from: "DennisK"Like many have said before, atheism is not defined by morals or lack of them.  It simply means you believe there is no god.

Indeed.  

Interesting vote so far.  For a group that's often considered harder to herd than cats, there seems to be little dissent.  Terribly curious as to who voted 'yes' and why.  I haven't voted yet, by the way.

Quote from: "LARA"Interesting vote so far.  For a group that's often considered harder to herd than cats, there seems to be little dissent.  Terribly curious as to who voted 'yes' and why.  I haven't voted yet, by the way.

Actually, I voted yes, because there are no stipulations as to what format the "code" should be. As far as I'm concerned, atheists should all follow a code of live-and-let-live, though that by no means should be canon, just a suggestion, just as the moral codes of so many religions are... flexible.

Quote from: "karadan"I define my system of morality by how i like to be treated.

I used to do that too but I found out that the Golden Rule has a huge flaw. Not everybody wants to be treated the same way. For example: Most people want others to be social, warm and friendly with them. However, I'm a quiet guy. I just want to be left alone to swim in my head peacefully. So I only use that rule when I know someone well enough to know what they want.

Atheists adopting a single moral code sounds a tad totalitarian to me. It's not as though we're a belief or a club or anything; just a non-category. Just because two people don't believe in the same something it doesn't mean that what they do believe is going to be remotely similar. There are atheists in the world that I'm more distant to in opinion than I am with Christians. We might as well be asking "should everyone adopt a single system of ethics?" And it's paradoxical because my answer can only depend on my own, personal set of ethics. Ergo, there's no scope for objectivity and it's impossible to make a rational argument either way.

Just to be contrarian, I voted yes, with caveats. I don't necessarily think that ALL atheists should adopt the same moral code any more than I would expect all established religions to have the exact same moral code. I do think that atheists should start organizing with others who have similar behavioral codes and ideals. The point behind this kind of organization would not be just to form another social group. It would be to reduce discrimination against atheists and increase public acceptance of atheism.

Check out this video on youTube: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w4fQA9mt-Mg

It points out that there are US states that still have laws preventing atheists from holding public office. It also gives a quote by the first President Bush (I have not personally verified it) where he says he believes that atheists should not be considered US citizens.

I can't remember where I ran across it, but I saw a statistic saying that 16% of the US population does not believe in god. This is a large minority that has almost no voice in politics or any other aspect of public life. I am regularly annoyed by the Religious Right, and I see no 'Secular Center' to balance that out.  It seems that only the communists support actual atheism, and I am a fan of free markets, so I can't go there.

I haven't really looked for groups advocating the rights of atheists in the US. Does anyone know of such a group? I'm curious.

Being part of an organized group with similar ideas doesn't mean you can't be a free-thinker as well.  Refusing to organize with others who have similar goals does mean you will be politically powerless.

Hey, thanks for voting everbody   :D

It seems to me that any group seeking to enlarge it's social cohesiveness must have a standard by which to judge threats to the community. It has been demonstrated that moral codes are not the prerogative of religion only, so to say that atheism is automatically opposed to such moral codes is rubbish. Moral codes don't arise because religions tell them to. The arise because communities need them to maintain order and growth. If atheists are serious about establishing a community or organizational presence, a moral code is a requirement.

I will say this however, the lack of religious authority on the atheist side means a recognition that no moral code is absolute. It would be much easier to have a set of moral guidelines that shall no longer apply when no longer useful. Nobody said a moral system HAD to be absolutely followed, and being free thinkers that we are, I think everyone would be more comfortable allowing a moral code that is allowed to be revised and debated indefinitely, rather than a canon set of laws that prescribe death for breaking them.

Either way, without a set of regulations, society can not exist.

I think Atheism is too broad to have any code other than the disbelief in a God, but it would be nice to have a bit of unification.