By what standard do you measure right and wrong...or do you?

[tcay584]

Just curious,
Ok, Ok, Ok, I'm an avowed christian. I am genuinely curious as to how those of another thought pattern develop their sense of right and wrong. What standard do you hold yourselves to, and why?

[Corvus]

Oh boy, a morality thread. I love morality threads!

Wouldn't natural selection reinforce pain in that we would feel compelled to remove weaker members of the race i.e. developmentally disable, the sensory impaired etc.? Maybe I am wrong, though I thought that breeding and food supply have always been motivators in the process of natural selection. It would seem to me that our morality has actually created an atmosphere where we go to great lengths to protect our weakest.

My knowledge of certain facets of evolutionary theory is hazy, but I think it works a little differently. I think the point is not to "strengthen" the species, but simply to survive. By surviving, even if the entire species are suffering from cretinism, they are defined as "fit" or "strong". I think that the perceived altruism of a species depends on how the species has developed. A female praying mantis thinks nothing of ripping the head of its lover after coupling with it, while the only other creature that we could even fathom doing such a thing is Margaret Thatcher.

The point of the books I listed is that it is silly to do so without God. To what purpose are we acting morally and what is morallity? If our lives are but a brief moment in time shouldn't we live only for ourselves? This is what Ayn Rand has to say on the matter she said that selfishness is the only true morality.

Yes, but selfishness still requires us to make allowances for the existence of other people who share in our life, unless one wants that brief moment in time which we call our life to be either worsened or reduced. All morality boils down to is "making concessions for others". Religious morality introduces another concept, and that is "making concessions for God". If a hermit existed who withdrew from the entire world and chose to live out his existence subsisting entirely on berries in a remote mountain, and supposing he thinks no longer about other people (which I make an allowance for, since in Judaism so much as thinking a wrong thought is enough to sin), then he would be completely amoral by any system of morality, but entirely good.

Nietzsche pointed out once we realize the implications of our atheism then we will see the absurdity of life and and the absurdity of acting morally. My question is why should we act morally if God does not exist.

First I would like to know why we should act morally if God does exist.

[TQWcS]

First I would like to know why we should act morally if God does exist.

God gives an ultimate purpose to life and gives us immortality. Without an ultimate purpose to life then our actions lack purpose. If our actions lack purpose then why act morally?

[ENIGMA]

If something doesn't trip up on either one of these two rules, then I would consider it a reasonable part of a moral code.

Good points. However, it still does not answer the question why should one act this way if they do not believe in God and they realize the absurdity of life.

Life is hardly absurd, not because it has some ultimate meaning or because God gives us some purpose, but because it is necessary for us to do anything and we only get one. That is why we should value it. Simple meta-economics.

[TQWcS]

If a hermit existed who withdrew from the entire world and chose to live out his existence subsisting entirely on berries in a remote mountain, and supposing he thinks no longer about other people (which I make an allowance for, since in Judaism so much as thinking a wrong thought is enough to sin), then he would be completely amoral by any system of morality, but entirely good.

First off, I would like to know how this person is amoral. Is it because he does not have moral beliefs? His actions are still morally good.

Yes, but selfishness still requires us to make allowances for the existence of other people who share in our life, unless one wants that brief moment in time which we call our life to be either worsened or reduced.

I don't see how selfishness requires us to make sacrifices for other people. If one is entirely selfish then they wouldn't care about other people.

All morality boils down to is "making concessions for others."

I believe that would depend on what the person decides is moral or not.

[Corvus]

First I would like to know why we should act morally if God does exist.

God gives an ultimate purpose to life and gives us immortality. Without an ultimate purpose to life then our actions lack purpose.

But why is that purpose any better from one we apply ourselves? Why is that purpose any better than one that another person tells me to follow? Finally, what is the ultimate purpose that God gives us?

[TQWcS]

Life is hardly absurd, not because it has some ultimate meaning or because God gives us some purpose, but because it is necessary for us to do anything and we only get one. That is why we should value it. Simple meta-economics.

In the end how was this one life significant to the grand scheme of things? How will it affect the universe? The Earth will eventually be burt up by the sun. Our sun will eventually die. After enough time has passed our whole universe will slip off into nothingness. Your one life would not have changed a thing. All of this would have still happened. Regardless of the fact that you were born. Why should we value something that doesn't have any true value or meaning?

[Corvus]

If a hermit existed who withdrew from the entire world and chose to live out his existence subsisting entirely on berries in a remote mountain, and supposing he thinks no longer about other people (which I make an allowance for, since in Judaism so much as thinking a wrong thought is enough to sin), then he would be completely amoral by any system of morality, but entirely good.

First off, I would like to know how this person is amoral. Is it because he does not have moral beliefs? His actions are still morally good.

What actions? Morality normally concerns itself with the treatment of other people. If there is no treatment of other people to be concerned about, there is no need for morality.

I don't see how selfishness requires us to make sacrifices for other people. If one is entirely selfish then they wouldn't care about other people.

If one is entirely selfish, one values their life and their quality of life, and one cannot simply care only about themselves in a society and mistreat their fellow man without expecting their own lives to be impacted by how people regard them. If I go to a restaurant and abuse the waitress, I can expect the cook to spit on the steak.

All morality boils down to is "making concessions for others."

I believe that would depend on what the person decides is moral or not.

I don't understand. Can you think of a moral rule held by someone that is not a concession for others or a concession for God?

[ENIGMA]

Life is hardly absurd, not because it has some ultimate meaning or because God gives us some purpose, but because it is necessary for us to do anything and we only get one. That is why we should value it. Simple meta-economics.

In the end how was this one life significant to the grand scheme of things? How will it affect the universe? The Earth will eventually be burt up by the sun. Our sun will eventually die. After enough time has passed our whole universe will slip off into nothingness. Your one life would not have changed a thing. All of this would have still happened. Regardless of the fact that you were born. Why should we value something that doesn't have any true value or meaning?

Will how much money you have in your bank account matter in the grand scheme of things?

If not, could you please give me all the required access numbers, passwords, etc. required to access your bank account?

Thanks in advance.

[TQWcS]

Sorry but it may take me awhile to respond to all of your responses. I have alot of work to do.

[bernee51]

First I would like to know why we should act morally if God does exist.

God gives an ultimate purpose to life and gives us immortality. Without an ultimate purpose to life then our actions lack purpose. If our actions lack purpose then why act morally?

I read somewhere recently that "the purpose of life is a life of purpose". In other words the source of the purpose of life resides solely with the liver.

Which in turn led me to think of the little old lady who had heard that ' life depends on the liver' so she took Andrews Liver Salts every day.

{Groan}