Evolutionary Purpose of Morality

[Wootah]

I think I worked it out.

The evolution purpose of morality is to forget the evil we have done and do.

No one can cope with the horror show of biology and human history. We are all descended for murderers, etc.

So in response morality evolved to help with an illusion that we are the good guys.

Does anyone want to debate my notion on the evolution of morality?

-----
Edited by otseng

[Clownboat]

I still don't know why atheists can't admit there is no such thing as morality?

mo·ral·i·ty
/məˈralədē/
noun
principles concerning the distinction between right and wrong or good and bad behavior.

It would be silly to think that a person that doesn't find any of the available god concepts to be real, can't admit that there is a distinction between right and wrong. One doesn't follow from the other. Now if a person was claiming that a god supplied this morality, then I could see an atheist rejecting that idea, but not morality as a whole.

I think it is the same reason as the Bible in Genesis. No one likes to be naked and ashamed. < not a slur, but an astute observation.

I trust you have corrected your misplaced observation that you had thought was astute.

Make it not arbitrary.

Have you corrected your thinking about atheists and how they can admit morality?
To make it not arbitrary, your choices are Yes or No.

[Wootah]

I still don't know why atheists can't admit there is no such thing as morality?

mo·ral·i·ty
/məˈralədē/
noun
principles concerning the distinction between right and wrong or good and bad behavior.

It would be silly to think that a person that doesn't find any of the available god concepts to be real, can't admit that there is a distinction between right and wrong. One doesn't follow from the other. Now if a person was claiming that a god supplied this morality, then I could see an atheist rejecting that idea, but not morality as a whole.

I think it is the same reason as the Bible in Genesis. No one likes to be naked and ashamed. < not a slur, but an astute observation.

I trust you have corrected your misplaced observation that you had thought was astute.

Make it not arbitrary.

Have you corrected your thinking about atheists and how they can admit morality?
To make it not arbitrary, your choices are Yes or No.

Make morality not arbitrary ... please?

[Clownboat]

Make morality not arbitrary ... please?

Ok. There is an all powerful God named Jeboda that created us and has demands.
For example:
"If a man happens to meet a virgin who is not pledged to be married and rapes her, and they are discovered, he shall pay the girl's father fifty shekels of silver. He must marry the girl, for he has violated her."
Bam! Morality about rape is now not arbitrary and all I had to do was invent a god concept. Obviously, I'll employ shamans that speak on behalf of this God that will help to relay this invented gods morality on to the populace in order for it to not be arbitrary.

Another:
Jeboda wants us to kill those that don't follow his teachings. Except for young girls that are virgins. Those we can keep for ourselves.
Morality about killing infidels is now not arbitrary and taking virgin girls as the spoils of war is A OK as well.

I can make just about anything I desire to be moral, see genocide and rape. What do you think, could I find a way to justify slavery too?

Religion is regarded by the common people as true, by the wise as false, and by the rulers as useful." Lucius Annaeus Seneca

I trust you are satisfied with my inventing a god concept in order to then claim that morality is not arbitrary like you requested.
Is inventing gods in order to control the masses moral though? I'll ask Jeboda and will get back to you with what I think, I mean, with what he thinks.

[Wootah]

[Replying to Clownboat in post #93]

Ok, you made morality arbitrary. Morality is the Santa Claus of atheists.

[oldbadger]

I think I worked it out.

The evolution purpose of morality is to forget the evil we have done and do.

No one can cope with the horror show of biology and human history. We are all descended for murderers, etc.

So in response morality evolved to help with an illusion that we are the good guys.

Does anyone want to debate my notion on the evolution of morality?

-----
Edited by otseng

I think that 'morality' is a fable adapted by the self righteous to justify themselves whilst putting down all others, even destroying others!

A person who keeps the laws of the land isn't a 'moral' person but a Lawful person.

A person who supports the poor is not 'moral' but a giving person.

Equally a thief is not 'immoral' but a lawless person.

And so on........... You see, 'moral' is just a rhetorical word with many uses in many different situations, cultures, religions etc...... handy for hiding behind.

[Clownboat]

[Replying to Clownboat in post #93]

Ok, you made morality arbitrary.

Twice in fact.

Morality is the Santa Claus of atheists.

Let's just go with that for the sake of this debate.

You forgot to answer this question though:
Is inventing gods in order to control the masses moral, useful or both? Let's leave your god concept off the table for this experiment as it will help to foster an honest answer. So your god concept is assumed to be true, what is your take on ALL the other god concepts humans have invented throughout history in order to make morality seem to not be arbitrary? Do you think rulers were able to control the masses because of the gods and do you thing it was useful for them to do so? Perhaps that is a valid reason for why humans invent god concepts?

[Wootah]

[Replying to Clownboat in post #93]

Ok, you made morality arbitrary.

Twice in fact.

Morality is the Santa Claus of atheists.

Let's just go with that for the sake of this debate.

You forgot to answer this question though:
Is inventing gods in order to control the masses moral, useful or both? Let's leave your god concept off the table for this experiment as it will help to foster an honest answer. So your god concept is assumed to be true, what is your take on ALL the other god concepts humans have invented throughout history in order to make morality seem to not be arbitrary? Do you think rulers were able to control the masses because of the gods and do you thing it was useful for them to do so? Perhaps that is a valid reason for why humans invent god concepts?

Historically, I think god concepts control the elites more. Anything to make the king think there is something higher than them. I always say: Any time someone believes that killing another person might be wrong is a good time (ok I am going to start saying that).

The other god concepts often indicate a common basis.

The idea that we are all made in the image of God is bible based and literally changed the world and brought the kings and queens down on that stumbling stone. Right?

[Clownboat]

The idea that we are all made in the image of God is bible based and literally changed the world and brought the kings and queens down on that stumbling stone. Right?

Religions have done this.
Readers, do not be fooled that this is unique or special to Christianity.

My point was that religions are useful to rulers. One ruler justifying the genocide of another, because their god concept desires it is what brings down kings and queens (leaders of competing tribes). This ability to get your populace to steal the land or the virgins of another tribe and feel justified in doing it is the usefulness I refer to. That a religion may or may not claim that we are made in the image of the said god(s) is irrelevant to how useful religions can be to rulers.

Imagine a scenario where a ruler wanted to take control of some land. Let's call it the Holy Land. Then, let's imagine that a pope, we can call him Pope Urban the 2nd, called for Christians to aid the Byzantine Empire that was ruled by Emperor Alexios I Komnenos and his promise of indulgences (forgiveness of sins) for those who participated is what ignited the first wave of crusades. Now, either there was a god concept (or two) that literally desired the Crusades to take place, or rulers were using religion for their own gains.

[Wootah]

The idea that we are all made in the image of God is bible based and literally changed the world and brought the kings and queens down on that stumbling stone. Right?

Religions have done this.
Readers, do not be fooled that this is unique or special to Christianity.

My point was that religions are useful to rulers. One ruler justifying the genocide of another, because their god concept desires it is what brings down kings and queens (leaders of competing tribes). This ability to get your populace to steal the land or the virgins of another tribe and feel justified in doing it is the usefulness I refer to. That a religion may or may not claim that we are made in the image of the said god(s) is irrelevant to how useful religions can be to rulers.

Imagine a scenario where a ruler wanted to take control of some land. Let's call it the Holy Land. Then, let's imagine that a pope, we can call him Pope Urban the 2nd, called for Christians to aid the Byzantine Empire that was ruled by Emperor Alexios I Komnenos and his promise of indulgences (forgiveness of sins) for those who participated is what ignited the first wave of crusades. Now, either there was a god concept (or two) that literally desired the Crusades to take place, or rulers were using religion for their own gains.

I think you missed my point. Religion has done more to control the elites than the plebs.

[Jose Fly]

I've never understood how some people can deny that humans create their own moral codes, when it should be obvious to anyone who has any understanding of human history and societies.

If all morality comes from God and humans are incapable of creating their own morality, that carries some very dark consequences.