Where does your morals/ethics come from?

[Loffler]

If we are a result of evolution, then there is no God, there are no rights or wrongs, anything goes, there is no sin. Murder is only wrong because someone may think that it is…not because it is. Moral relativism reigns.

The fact that so many Christians say this leads me to question whether it's such a good idea for atheists to try to convert Christians to atheism. People who say the above are basically admitting they have no internal morality; maybe you people can't be trusted with the truth.

  to Loffler!!! I couldn't have said it any better. If Christians believe that the only way to know right from wrong is religion, well, Loffler said it best.


But maybe convert is the wrong word and way to go about it. Converting is something religious people like to do. We atheist don't need to do that, all we need to do is just plant the seed of doubt in there brain and hope it grows. Maybe it is a form of converting but I don't like calling it that.

It works like this:


Preaching the good word of atheism isn't for converting the Extreme Christians. It's for the Marginal Christians who are having some doubts, and if you're really convincing and invest the time, maybe the Skeptical Christian as well.

[atheist2308]

Preaching the good word of atheism isn't for converting the Extreme Christians. It's for the Marginal Christians who are having some doubts, and if you're really convincing and invest the time, maybe the Skeptical Christian as well.

I see your point there.

[Martian]

I’ve had a few atheistic friends over the years, although I could never grasp their reasoning. (I’ll let you label me an idiot up front just to save you time) A question I’ve always had is, if I were an atheist, and we were having a discussion and you pissed me off enough to kill you, and I did, why would that be wrong? Actually, the scenario doesn’t really matter. If I kill you for any reason, what’s the problem?
You may have moral reasons, although I don’t know why. The only difference between humans and the animal kingdom is we have an intelligence they don’t. So what? If you say that intelligence gives us a moral reasoning or some sort, Who cares. That would be your opinion, not mine. If I get by with it and don’t get caught, I’m scot-free, right? If you say in killing you I may have taken you away from family and friends who love you. Again, so what? Why would I care?

I admit, to me an atheist would be someone who believes in evolution or something other than a creator. We are just random chance little better than the animal kingdom, or no better. Doesn’t that mean we can just makeup our own rules? Do what ever we want as long as we can get by with it and not get caught by our own collective man made rules? What would limit us? Civility and laws are just a collective thought (rule) that maybe I in particular may not agree with. What would stop me from killing you? And why would that be bad?

I’m just curious what would be your reasoning from an atheistic point of view. I haven’t received a “reasonable” answer so far.

This is all really thought provoking. I, myself, have been thinking about morality and what the word really means.

From my current perspective, morality does seem meaningless to me, with or without a god. How do you suppose we "get our morality"? (what does "get our morality" mean anyway?)

[Tom62]

The fact that so many Christians say this leads me to question whether it's such a good idea for atheists to try to convert Christians to atheism. People who say the above are basically admitting they have no internal morality; maybe you people can't be trusted with the truth.

I think that goes a little bit too far. I am sure that theists have internal morality. The only difference is that they think that their morality comes from a higher being. When for example a christian child would steal a cookie from a cookie jar his parents will punish the child, just like atheist parents would do. Both children will learn that stealing is bad so the end effect is the same. However the christian child may be told that stealing is morally bad in the eyes of Jesus/God while the atheist child may be told that stealing is bad because it harms other people and that people who steal end up in prison.

[Loffler]

The fact that so many Christians say this leads me to question whether it's such a good idea for atheists to try to convert Christians to atheism. People who say the above are basically admitting they have no internal morality; maybe you people can't be trusted with the truth.

I think that goes a little bit too far. I am sure that theists have internal morality. The only difference is that they think that their morality comes from a higher being. When for example a christian child would steal a cookie from a cookie jar his parents will punish the child, just like atheist parents would do. Both children will learn that stealing is bad so the end effect is the same. However the christian child may be told that stealing is morally bad in the eyes of Jesus/God while the atheist child may be told that stealing is bad because it harms other people and that people who steal end up in prison.

Exactly. That Christian child in your example has not cultivated an internal morality.

[Tom62]

That Christian child in your example has not cultivated an internal morality.

In both cases the child learns that stealing is bad, because the parents taught the child that it is bad. The only difference is that atheist parents leaves out the supernatural aspect. Since most Christians are very decent people, who love their children as much as atheist parents do, it is very likely that the parents of the christian child also taught the child that stealing is bad because it harms other people. From my point of view the internal morals of both children are then cultivated on the same level.

Should the christian child however been  brought up in a fundamentalist environment then its upbringing will be fundamentally  different. In that case the morals of the child will come from parent who have a distorted worldview. The development of the internal morality could then be become damaged, because the child will only learn morals from its parents out of the fear from God. Leaving out the human aspect in the child's upbringing is something what I (and many other atheist) find so scary.

[Loffler]

That Christian child in your example has not cultivated an internal morality.

In both cases the child learns that stealing is bad, because the parents taught the child that it is bad. The only difference is that atheist parents leaves out the supernatural aspect. Since most Christians are very decent people, who love their children as much as atheist parents do, it is very likely that the parents of the christian child also taught the child that stealing is bad because it harms other people. From my point of view the internal morals of both children are then cultivated on the same level.

By definition, a morality based on God watching you is external. You are motivated by a fear of an external force punishing you rather than being motivated by fear of one's internal guilt.

There is evidence, however, that this external morality can translate or transition into a second, internal morality, and that evidence is the fact that many if not most ex-Christians retain their moral sense after losing their faith. But we're not talking about them; we're talking about the Christians who ask atheists where morality comes from.

[Tom62]

There is evidence, however, that this external morality can translate or transition into a second, internal morality, and that evidence is the fact that many if not most ex-Christians retain their moral sense after losing their faith. But we're not talking about them; we're talking about the Christians who ask atheists where morality comes from.

Very good point. The 2nd part of my previous posting already made it clear that fundamentalist Christians harm children by exposing them to the external (God) "morality" only, which brings in elements of fear (of God), intolerance (towards non-Christians, homosexuals, women, etc.) and other bad stuff literally taken from the Bible. Discussing morality with these kind of people is hopeless, because in their worldview there is no place for internal morality.

[tdh26]

The last few posts have tried to explain how christians get their morality. I would put it this way; when you want to learn something, you go to someone who knows the subject more than you. A team has a coach, a school has teachers, universities a professor, as so on. That's typically how we get or share knowledge. Libraries are full of information we get from other people, not ourselves. How long do professors go to school...Wow!
Once the christian comes to the conclusion that there is a God and he created the universe, you use his 'rule' book because that is the knowledge ot truth. Who else would be better able to explain his creation than the one who made it?
Furthermore, everyone of us is biased in one way or another. Scientists, Doctors, teachers, you and me. In one sense I see this as a bad thing. It can lead us in the wrong direction
because the mind tends to gather information it is looking for. That's why you are here and not hanging around at the christain sites. Please don't respond to the last sentence as I don't have time to respond back to that one!
Once you made the very foundation of beliefs, God - no god, you start gathering information to support it and each side claims to have supporting evidence.

I like Loffler's pix of beliefs, but it's a two way street, not a one way street.

[afreethinker30]

Here we have it there are good theist folk and good atheist folk.We may all get our morals from different sources and have different reasons for them.The only thing that matters is that people aren't running chaotic in the streets murdering and harming others.Maybe it is that humans have morality spot on the brain.We don't know yet.But I'm sure one day we will.I think atheist get upset on the issue because we are always attacked when it comes to purpose and morals.I have heard of only one atheist who used his non-religion against theists.But many times theist attacking other religious groups for belief.Just because I don't share your belief in God doesn't mean that my morals are any less then the next persons.There is to much hate in the world and if people would only think about how it does no good for anyone,maybe things would change.Alot of atheist do understand morals and religion because alot of us grew up with religion.I personally don't think using god to stop a child from stealing a cookie is the best way to go about it.Telling a child that a sky god is watching you and you are being good to go to heaven isn't a lesson in morals.It's scaring a child into not doing something wrong.Just like offering a cookie to behave.There is no lesson in it just be good to earn a reward.I would like to think that someone would tell their child not to steal because it harms other people.That teaches the child to think about others not just themself.

[atheist2308]

Think about this. If someone came up to you with a gun or knife or something and you felt like your life was in danger and they were going to try to kill you, are you thinking about your morals? No. You are think either run, kill or be killed. Your morals would be long gone at that point and your natural animal instincts for survival would kick in because we are animals, which we seem to forget.

You could pray to your god to help you but I would call the cops because they'll actually show up.

Edit: I should also say that when it comes down to a situation like that (and others), it doesn't matter where we get our morals or why we have them because in that moment its about survival.

[Loffler]

The last few posts have tried to explain how christians get their morality. I would put it this way; when you want to learn something, you go to someone who knows the subject more than you. A team has a coach, a school has teachers, universities a professor,

Zoos have animals...

as so on. That's typically how we get or share knowledge. Libraries are full of information we get from other people, not ourselves. How long do professors go to school...Wow!
Once the christian comes to the conclusion that there is a God and he created the universe, you use his 'rule' book because that is the knowledge ot truth. Who else would be better able to explain his creation than the one who made it?
Furthermore, everyone of us is biased in one way or another. Scientists, Doctors, teachers, you and me. In one sense I see this as a bad thing. It can lead us in the wrong direction
because the mind tends to gather information it is looking for. That's why you are here and not hanging around at the christain sites. Please don't respond to the last sentence as I don't have time to respond back to that one!
Once you made the very foundation of beliefs, God - no god, you start gathering information to support it and each side claims to have supporting evidence.

My information gathering as a Christian lead me to atheism.

I like Loffler's pix of beliefs, but it's a two way street, not a one way street.

Lately it's been a pretty one-way street.

[Martian]

Once the christian comes to the conclusion that there is a God and he created the universe, you use his 'rule' book because that is the knowledge ot truth. Who else would be better able to explain his creation than the one who made it?

Morality is not an explaination of something, it's an enforced code of rules set down by someone that thought that "this is right".

Furthermore, everyone of us is biased in one way or another. Scientists, Doctors, teachers, you and me. In one sense I see this as a bad thing. It can lead us in the wrong direction
because the mind tends to gather information it is looking for.

That's so true. But it is possible to stay objective if you try. I do my best.

That's why you are here and not hanging around at the christain sites. Please don't respond to the last sentence as I don't have time to respond back to that one!

I have to respond to this allegation. That is an assumption that isn't true, at least for me. I have been browsing the Christian forums regularily for over a year now.

Once you made the very foundation of beliefs, God - no god, you start gathering information to support it and each side claims to have supporting evidence.

Well, let's not get into that, as that will lead into an entire discussion that is irrelevant to the discussion at hand.

---

I don't like the way this discussion is going. "Where we get our morals" is not as important as "what the justification for our morals is so that we can impose them on others". What if Hitler told me that stealing, rape, and murder were wrong? Would that mean that I'm getting my morals from Hitler? Is that good/bad? It doesn't matter because you're not thinking about the justifcation for those morals. Of course, if you continue on looking for a justification for a moral code, you realize that it's completely subjective, making justification for imposing that moral code objectively impossible.

In reality, any moral code is completely meaningless if it is unenforced. If one thinks that stealing is wrong, will they sit back and allow someone to take his/her things? No, they must enforce their rule on others, or else it is meaningless. But once someone enforces their own moral code on others, they become intolerant of others' moral codes. Really, morality is just a matter of a powerful authority pushing their morals on others. This can be in the form of parents, government, or God (or rather man speaking for a god they claim exists). It's all the same: "because he holds the gun."

Of course, I maybe just confused. Does anyone have anything to say about this?