/lit/ - Literature

Ask Spinoza

>>14052587
I don't.
This will sound edgy but i'd have no concerns murdering and raping if it weren't for legal and social repercussions.

>>14052602
This. Most atheists today are just non-theistic christians. Even most"pagans are in reality just pissed because they think that christians aren't being christian/universalist enough. Morals are made-up.

>>14052599
after you do come and tell us what he said

They have a conscience, which is just another name for "god." What this conscience says is socially informed. Really, morals are a meme, literally, socially conditioned into a person. They exist because they are practical, only a society with a moral system that prevents self-annihilation will continue to exist.

>>14052587
By being taught morals derived from religion, whether the belief is there or not.

>>14052587
>be theist
>compelled to do things or else face punishment
>thinking this constitutes you being moral
lmao, how the fuck do theists have morality? Aren't they just responding to fear and bribery?

>>14052615
Kant called Spinoza a "righteous atheist" in the Critique of Judgement, or someone who lived in accordance with the moral law without subscribing to ideas of a moral God or the highest good. Kant's only real argument against this, which is fair to a certain extent, but doesn't prove that moral atheism is impossible, is that the atheist will simply succumb to despair and lose the motivation to follow morality without faith in the highest good.

Evolution, nigger? We're social animals. Perhaps the early humans who didn't have clinical psychopaths had their tribe survive and procreate better. Higher animals such as apes have shown to have empathy - they have concepts like fairness and reciprocating good behavior. Animals with less evolved brains don't show this capability. Ålso there are brain regions associated with empathy, compassionate decision-making, and affective processing.

>>14052587
By adhering to a hierarchy of values.

>>14052610
>non-theistic christians.
That is an oxymoron.

>H-h-h-how can you be free to create your own ethic? Th-th-that’s crazy.
That’s the way the world works.

>>14052657
Virtue ethics

>>14052587
Practically

>>14052639
This

Everybody has morals, because life is tough and you need to agree on some basic rules to cooperate and survive. Whether you think there's a supernatural being behind it all is a different question.

There's plenty of people who swear they're atheists and yet are living according to Christian morals. Probably more than in the average church LOL.

IMHO most people would prefer to think there was a supernatural being behind their morals just for peace of mind, because man is fallible and they don't want to think that their morals were made up arbitrarily.

And they kinda aren't made up arbitrarily, because your morals depend on your society like Nietzsche's slave/master morality. So maybe society is God.

>>14052657
based

arguably atheists are the only ones who can be moral agents who make real choices while everyone else just responds to ideological condition and deference for some magical sky daddy

Intelligence. Its inherently wrong to kill and steal and rape in advanced society. That fact that you need a book that's missing whole chapters to teach you how to behave is sad. It's not that hard to distinguish right from wrong on most aspects. Religion is a carrot/stick hack valuable to society 2000 years ago when the unwashed masses needed order and structure to advance. Now you should do these thing because you'd be retarded not to. The police state has replaced the religous stranglehold and now if you break the rules your looking at years behind bars. The police state is the new religion and only authority. The bible was for some times. Spirituality is a better bet I'm not saying I'm going for that either just always ask questions. God made mistakes too ask me about them

>>14052657
How is behaving good out of fear bad agin?
What happens to the people who are doing that when the fear is gone? What stops them from tuning bad.
That is asuming good and bad exist outside of God(they don't).

>>14052699
Many morals are not bad tho? Not killing, not stealing, no raping not coveting , treat as u wish to be treated. Those make the utmost sense. Mindless following of an unseen omnipresent entity whose un wavering faith is all he asks is a little much. That's proof right there that they are gathing cattle to fill their coffers

>>14052663
Imagine giving a single fuck about what Kant said

>>14052763
Freedom. Ever been to prison? How bad are we talking here. If someone just can't see the difference between right and wrong they they will end up dead or in the system. Most people like that are mentally I'll and wont last long

>>14052639
Religion was derived from morals though. That's why ancient scripture has fucked up primitive morality interspersed through it.

>>14052699
You had me in the first half not gonna lie. Society is not God because society is not entirely omnipresent to account for every immoral act. Morals were guidelines handed down to the people for good living and healthy lifestyles. Before religion, people made their own morals which were mostly flawed. Religion fixed flawed morality by giving a universal agreement upon cross-civilizations. Whether it was man made or word from God there is a grey area.

>>14052808
That is still behaviour encouraged by fear, just human fear not form God.

>>14052751
Atheist is a pusyy ass cop out in a pathetic effort to cover bases. Although it is the most factual of religious dogma because we really cant say is that we really dont know. Also it important to keep an open mind but as I mentioned religion is for a simpler time. People back then needed things to believe in to keep social structure

>>14052751
How the fuck are you making real choices you are doing the exact opposite

>>14052800
Imagine being this dumbass

>>14052816
That's true but it's a real percieved threat. Not a spooky ghost. Although I wholeheartedly agree there seems to be no carrot and bigger stick

>>14052810
I've been trying to make this point myself it's simply dogma to encourage higher and more enlightened reflection

>>14052673

That is not morality. There is no need to follow this system. You assume that survival/evolution whatever is an inherent good, but here is no basis for this.

>>14052638
>morals are a meme
>they exist because they are practical
So they're working as intended and are not a meme you fucking dunce

>What stops them from tuning bad.
same thing that makes us want to hug baby mammals. Empathy. Many people need the state to keep them in check, but that doesn't mean all of us would rape and kill if it was legal. I know quite a few Christians who probably would though.

>>14052855
I'm enjoying our conversation. So bottom line, some organizations will always be in place, to keep the bad guys at bay. Not necessarily a good thing but that's a story for another time. Being atheist do you pray? It's a very interesting topic. The bible asks for unwavering faith. But asking questions is was has brought us through the dark time to modern day. Its the mark of an intelligent mind to come to your conclusion on your own. Us as humans psychology wise a excellent copycats. Only a select few can actually create

>>14052587
sex is the god of atheism
>How do atheists have morals?
they don't, and they can't

>>14052587
are you 12? take a phil 101 course retard

>>14052905
Bait. To say I need my morals from a fucking 2000 year old book that's been tapered with and the translation is "close" at best if that's what you want to base modern living off of you are an enemy of progress and a sheep

>>14052890
AKA diddling pastors. The whole system needs to be cleaned up idk I fell out of politics. How much wasted money is slipping through the cracks you think

>>14052682
Religion is trickles down into culture.

>>14052599

I thought Spinoza was a pantheist?

>>14052876

>not knowing what a meme is

I can give you the hundred 100IQ response to this question, but only if I receive 5 you's.

small price to pay for enlightenment

This is the only scripture that ever made sence to me. It's all so old different tribes have butchered and changed name. Does god care? Idk. gods real name is Yahweh according to the first papyrus scrolls. God-is a canaanite word. They fucked it up that quickly.

>>14052587
Muh feelings

The only way to know God is through divine revelation, not through your gay ass books

Either ressentiment, some unperceived inclination towards a theistic morality, or an appeal to the perfection of structure. Or perhaps they pursue something beyond all of this, beyond truth and beyond any ideal that is either known or postulated.

It makes sense why a lot of people, atheists or those with faith, keep spewing out fake scripture like 'God's plan' as if it's some cosmic bandage. Maybe you have some notion that heaven is merely continuation of your life. I had woman of mine that brought up angels and said 'you cant look at an angel or it'll melt your face off' like it the there were rules and the rules were actually some memory of Raiders of the Lost Ark. That's the kind of religious culture that is being passed around these days and it's fucking dogshit.

Reason is not naturally part of the human experience because we are creatures. We try to understand reason with metaphysics, science, and ethics, but truth beyond that is impossible. We are all living in sin and God will forgive the unforgivable. There is only one guilt God cannot forgive, that is, not being willing to believe in His greatness

>>14052587
What is an 'atheist'?
What are 'morals'?

>>14052983

Where do you get your „forgiveness rule“ from? How do you know it to be more true than the „face melting rule“? I’m not even an atheist, but you don’t have anymore of a basis for your belief than that Angel woman

>>14052587
Mother nature

>>14053008
You're absolutely correct. Sure my basis is from the Bible, but in someways it is no different than that woman who believes in that Indiana Jones movie. The answer is that I have more faith and no doubt.

>>14052587
We don't, we have ethics instead.

>>14053062
and ethics are just social norms so that Agamemnon looks like a tragic hero when he sacrifices his daughter Iphigenia.

>>14052587
they don't, they have preferences

>>14052751
>atheists are the only real moral agents
That's sad because atheism more often than not coincides with degeneracy.
Which nicely fits into the christian teaching, about how every good thing we do can only be done thanks to the grace of God.

>>14052751
yeah, all you STD ridden tranny atheists that eat ass all day and share memes while being 'woke' sure have a ton of agency.

>>14052587
Morals are maintained as voluntary restrictions on our impulses in order to pursue certain goals. They're no longer founded on virtue but on practicalism.

>>14052587
philosophy and ethics

>muh judeochristian values

>>14052638
>morals are a meme
>socially conditioned
Is society not a reflective of real actual physical properties in reality? Something being a result of society or culture doesn't magically turn it into a spook.

>>14052657
Is it moral to not do what I do not wish to do? If I dislike the taste of beer, am I exhibiting temperance by not consuming it? If I like the taste of beer but not the state of being drunk, am I exhibiting temperance by only drinking a little? If I like the taste of beer and I like being drink but I hate that I make a fool of myself and being the object of the mockery of others, am I exhibiting temperance by only drinking a moderate amount?
Morality in the viewpoint of an atheist is an incoherent idea, for if there is no ultimate consequence for my actions then there is no reason not to do whatever I wish to do. An atheist reasons that they do not rape or murder because they have some innate empathy towards man and this is the basis of their morality, I contend that this simply causes a person not to want to commit the crime. I do not rape or murder because I do not enjoy the prospect of someones elses suffering, hence I would not rape or murder under any circumstance, atheist or not, because rape and murder are not temptations.
To be moral is to resist temptation, in order to be a temptation something must be a desirable action in its entirety, upon weighing the WHOLE action it must appeal to me, and yet I must still refrain from committing it. There is no logical reason an atheist would ever refrain from committing an act that they WHOLLY desired to commit, an atheist can only point to actions that they do not commit that they only partially want to commit (theft, etc) but this is not morality but disposition. Morality must be rooted in the irrational, rational morality is simply the calculated workings of a machine and is subsequently not morality at all.

>>14053493
People are fundamentally good, things like religion corrupt their true nature.

>>14054194
> People are fundamentally good

People fundamentally do what is in their best interest. Personal goodness for most people exists only to their friends and neighbors, with "goodness" manifesting itself as decency or courtesy to the rest (which isn't saying much). And even then, how many people can't even do that much?

People's true nature is to rut, hoard, and gloat like animals, and religion at its best restrains those impulses. At its worse it facilitates them.

>>14054194
False without religion people cannot be good or bad because good or bad requires irrational acting. Without religion people are just complicated machines. Religion is the spark of insanity that distinguishes us from robots. Atheists are LITERALLY NPCs

>>14054217
>People fundamentally do what is in their best interest.
https://www.nature.com/news/2010/100825/full/news.2010.427.html

demonstrably wrong

>>14054252
Your words are certainly irrational, I'll give you that.

>>14052587
This is why Christians are more trusted as a whole, even by atheists

>>14052587
Ethics school of philosophy, the white man's religion

>>14053493
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Euthyphro_dilemma
It's moral to want to do the right things. You are but a slave, and slaves clearly are not moral agents. you are not making choices, you are simply cowering before an overwhelming master.

I dont

>>14052587
They usually follow a kind of hedonism (in the modern sense of the world). They believe that pleasure is the only good. That something is only bad if it harms others (by reducing pleasure, increasing pain or making it harder to get more pleasure/less pain).

So, in the end it is no wonder that atheism leads to worse morality.

If you look at magazines for women, they tell women that the best lifestyle is partying a lot in your youth, sleep with dozens of bad boys and when you get tired of it you marry some rich man who can give you a comfortable life. That having a career with high status and high pay is super important. And to not have kids because they decrease your money and the time you have to party.

This is your morals on atheism.

>>14054356
>>>/r9k/

>>14052663
Reading this reminds me of how different Western morality is from say Buddhist morality, in which there are heavy moral precepts and responsibility, along with non-theism, yet never such a dilemma involving despair.

>>14054385
/lit/ is a Christian board.

>>14054457
No. /r9k/ is your christian board.

>>14054329
Why is it called slave?

>>14054473
I don't know if you realize this, but you are not exactly someone who is in the majority here.

>>14054496
Unfortunately true. Not sure how this board ended up being invested by unironic religious retards, but hey.

>>14054489
There is no such thing as 'good' and 'evil'. There is only what people are comfortable with, and not comfortable with. This of course varies greatly between all people. Particularly between those who are strong (biologically, materially) and weak. Master morality originates in strength, and slave morality originates in weakness.

You can read more here, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Master%E2%80%93slave_morality

>>14054517
Reactionism is one heck of a drug.

>>14052933
>>14052933
>>14052933
>>14052933
>>14052933

>>14052587
Morality is doing whatever benefits you the most. Theistic morality is universal, fixed, and known to humans, whereas atheists must form their own morality. Both systems are faith-based.

>>14053125
>>14053090
That's rich coming from the people that either hold to the highest standart of morality a ring of corrupt pedophiles (catholics), pretend like a bunch of socially cut-off, self-pitying virgins are the pinacle of wisdom (orthodox) or try to implement literally the teachings and rules of two books, one written roughly 3.000 years ago and the next 2.000 years ago to the modern world, as if we are all jews from back then and still have the same issues (protestants)

>>14052587
I feel very afraid and guilty when I see poor homeless people on the streets and it makes me feel a tiny bit better when I give them some money.

>>14052587
Well, I think this thread proves how low iq /lit/ is.
Human beings evolved morals to allow for social cooperation and group living. "fairness" and "honor" are part of the human psyche because the groups who had those traits survived better than the groups without them. Religion gets its morals from human beings, not the other way around.

>>14053090
>the prison population is more theistic than the general population
>the higher educated you are, the more likely you are an atheist
>the higher IQ you are the more likely you are an atheist
yep, all that non-crime committing, high IQ degeneracy

>>14052587
I'm not even an atheist, but I've never understood how people think atheists don't have morals? I am not even attacking the statement, just asking for an elaboration.

Can't someone come to the conclusion that they should be good to others without a god? You don't have to read philosophy or theology to understand that if you're a dick nobody will want to associate with you.

>>14052587
Reason

>>14055121
most degeneracy is legal, so thats not an argument
>>14054863
>priests are pedos waaah
Only retards will listen to this.
>>14054447
>Falling for the buddhism = atheism meme

>>14052587
The real question is, does Religion? Pretty sure all religions were 100% okay with slavery until secular progression eventually pushed for it's official ban

>>14053285

>>14055143
>he doesn't care that official Catholic priests defiled little boys who were in their care
>he doesn't care that the Catholic Church deliberately and consciously moved these child rapists around to different places to harbor them from justice
your reaction shows how morally superior you are

>>14055171
>rates of pedophilia amongst catholics: 0.2%
>rates of pedophilia amongst teachers: 2%
>reeeeeeer those damn catholics
And your reaction shows that you just vomit back leftist propaganda
Not a rational agent desu

>>14052587
Through social pressure - just like Christians.

>>14055188
oh sorry, I wasn't aware of any schools purposely harboring pedophiles from the law, just the Catholic Church

>>14055188
I don't doubt your statistics right here, but could you give me a source on those pedophilia statements

>>14055188
Now tell me the rate in priests.

>>14052587
The morality of an atheist is nothing more than taking christian morality and then pretending it has nothing to do with christianity.

>>14055132
They all are literal psychopaths who just think that an omniscient man in the sky will fuck them up if they step out of line.

>>14055201
Thats the 0.2%, I mistyped

>>14055208
Source?

>>14052587
Are things good because God says they are, or are things good because they are good in themselves?

>>14053465
>>14052876
a meme is not necessarily a negative value judgement, your brains are too 4chan poisoned. Morals are spirits, or spooks, or whatever fucking german word for ghost. But they're also real, and useful. The point of this conclusion however, is that they're not Truths, they're not immutable parts of reality, they can be remolded, or exorcised.

>>14052587
Everyone has morals. Just like everyone has a sense of pain, pleasure, good taste, good sound, bad taste, bad sound, kindness, rudeness, happiness, sadness, everyone has a sense for good and bad (except psychopaths, of course).
They might vary, based on genetics, culture, personal experience and analysis.
Because of this variation, civilizations took the most popular and common views and codified them into religious and civic laws in order to have a better functioning society.
In some cultures, morality has been so closely tied to their religion for so long that some believe that morality does not exist without religion.
However, in Korea for example, morality came from Confucian teachings for centuries, not their superstitions.
We see memes of moral values existing in religion, laws, societal norms, conventions, etiquettes, backed by genetic bases that progammed people to be able to tell goodness from badness.

>>14052657
>>be atheist
>>compelled to do things or else face punishment from the law
>>thinking this constitutes you being moral
>lmao, how the fuck do atheists have morality? Aren't they just responding to fear and bribery?

>>14055143
Buddhism is non-theistic, in that it doesn't derive it's theology or morality around either a creator-deity or the lower deities which it acknowledges to exist.

>>14055152
Not simply "okay with", but in support of. Religions and their followers think they've solved the philosophical problem pertaining to moral objectivity, and I wish that were true. But it's clearly not the case in many areas, for which religious followers no longer adhere to what their own faith had originally prescribed. If you think Paul, Peter, James or the Early Church Fathers carry your exact moral positions, you are unfortunately mistaken. Humanity will always continue to advance it's conception of what morality constitutes, and leave earlier generations to appear barbaric in comparison. I believe that animal rights are the next frontier of liberation, for example. The way humanity, including Abrahamic religion, has treated other animal species during the past millenia has been horrific. And just as we no longer follow the slavery of the ancients, neither are we likely to follow the killing, consumption, and commodification of non-human species which we have for so long.

>>14055221
God has created a world such that some things are beneficial and others are not. He then tells us what benefits us. Things are good because that’s how God created them.

>>14052909
>tips

>>14053493
Goddam these woman are hot

>>14054599
This. Obviously biological beings have some idea of what is good for them. But with the complexity of choice we often find ourselves unable to rely on instinct, and sometimes we cannot simply “calculate” the best decision due to our ignorance of causes and future phenomena. We are all using faith everyday in our decisions. There is nothing wrong with seeking benefit, but some do it in the wrong way...

>>14055211
There are 414,582 catholic priests in the world.
In the last then years, there were 884 cases of pedophilia, where the priests were actually found guilty and removed from their position.
Thats 0.21%.

Sources:
Wikipedia

>>14055279
Last 10 years*
>>14055247
>Buddhism is non-theistic
Except it isn't.
>it doesn't derive it's theology or morality around either a creator-deity or the lower deities which it acknowledges to exist
It derives it's morality based on what is the best way of approaching the divine realm.
In fact they are very strict about their morality, they just don't see moralism as a principle that will neccessarily apply after they arrived to their destination.

>>14055292
>It derives it's morality based on what is the best way of approaching the divine realm.
That is exactly what christianity does too lmao.
Atheist libtards BTFO eternally.

>>14055279
Alright. I can see that one. The John Jay report says it is between 0.5% and 1%. It has data for over 70 years, so I'd assume that it is closer to reality than doing a calculation from Wikipedia info. Nonetheless, both results show that fewer Catholic priests are pedophiles than the average world population (being 0.5% to 5%)

>>14055204
This is an interesting comment anon. In my opinion, ethics can be followed independently of cultural mythologies. In fact, I'd imagine that a Christian is either following Christian morality because they believe in it as being intrinsically correct, or simply because it was commanded by their culture i.e arbitrarily. But presuming it was the former, wouldn't they still follow it regardless of the peripheral belief-system? If you truly believe that kindness, forgiveness, love, compassion, generosity, gentleness, charitableness and all the other values which Christianity promotes were intrinsically correct or superior to their opposites (unkindness, revenge, hatred, etc), then would you not continue to follow those values regardless of whether you started or stopped believing that Jesus was the Son of God, and in a Personal God on the whole? Christian morality isn't unique to Christianity, we find it somewhere like Buddhism for example, which arrived several centuries earlier, and which does not ground it's ethics in any external deity.

What I have difficulty understanding, then, is why someone who once followed Christianity would no longer follow it's basic moral code - since that means they potentially lacked positive belief in that moral code's inherent truth in the first place, following it arbitrarily i.e because God had selected those ethics, and could change them at any future occasion.

Though I'm not an atheist myself, and do ground my personal morality in my own belief on the Divine.

>>14053493
But at the same time, something is only called a temptation because there's a reason not to do it. The reason can be ill-concevied (e.g., it was so written by a bunch of dumbass desert nomads), or it can be convincing (e.g., the biggest reason not to routinely drink is cirrhosis/liver cancer). Speaking of drugs, there's a drug that nearly everyone routinely takes, and that has shown no negative long-term consequences for its use and in fact is generally believed to have both short- and long-term benefits--so while there are caffeine memes (like the "can't start the day without coffee" thing), it's generally not regarded as a temptation. (And yes, I know that Mormons consider iced tea a hot drink.)
So I guess, if we follow your road the rest of the way, it seems there can't be morality, because a temptation is something one has reason to resist.

This board is retarded. The answer lies here >>14054599
>>14055275

>>14055188
>teachers and priests are on the same level
getting a degree in education is not the same as becoming a catholic priest lmao

>>14055325
>comparing a sub-population to the general population without factoring in age, sex, ethnicity etc.

yikes

>>14055244
Funny inversion, but to be fair theists have two set of lawmakers hanging over them, from which to worry the repercussions of. It's just that they consider one merely societal, and the other one transcendent. Whereas an atheist would only fear the former, presumably.

>>14055355
Alright, I'll admit it, you have a point. Would you do the math then?

>>14055333
>ethics can be followed independently of cultural mythologies

Sure they can, but after a while when enough generations pass, you will eventually have to return to the tree that bore you that fruit.
Or you gotta make your own tree, and you better make sure it stands in solid ground.

As an ex-atheist, I can tell you, that the reason why I originally abandoned christianity was that I wanted to have lots of sex, and I wanted to experiment with all sorts of degeneracy, which I did.

But the truth is that I would have been better off being a sexually repressed christian, than as a burnt out degenerate.

Atheists don't have morality, really, they have preferences, and they only use morality as a justification when they need to enforce their will. It's not a guiding principle for them, it's just a tool they employ whenever deem it neccessary, not realizing that it's always neccessary.

>>14055352
we were talking about rates of pedophilia you dumbass
>>14055361 Hey there!
>>14055279 (This is me)
>>14055355 (this is not me)

>>14055292
Anon, you're conflating theism and Divinity together. They are not the same. Buddhism is based around abstract Divine essences (i.e love, compassion, etc), not around personal, cosmic lawmakers who watch over you and punish you for wrong behavior.

I myself believe in Heaven, many Divine realities, and in an objective moral ontology to some degree, but have never believed in a personal deity who created the universe and/or takes my prayers.

>>14055388
I don't actually conflate them, I just understand a great deal about both buddhism and christianity, because I was educated in the non-new-age tradition (my mom is a buddhist from Burma).
They most certainly believe in a supreme God, and the reason why he doesn't have to punish you for your trespasses is because your trespasses are their own punishments. Being a degenerate lecher is it's own punishment, because you become enslaved by your own baser desires.

I was educated in a Jesuit-run high-school and we had mandatory religious education classes as well. The same thing applies to catholicism pretty much. Punishment is not dealt by God, it's dealt by our own hands, because by our sins, we remove ourselves farther and farther from God's grace, and we end up punishing ourselves eternally in an afterlife because decided to stray too far from the source of all that is good.

>>14055362
A person could believe that Christ's ethical teachings were objectively superior to their inverse or absence, while not believing his metaphysical assertions (the Father, the Holy Spirit, Hell, Heaven, etc) to be literally true in reality (though perhaps symbolically so, or similar) They should pay credit to Christ for the moral framework he laid within their society, but he has no obligation to either become a believing Christian or to accept Christian metaphysics as correct. I'm happy your religion has helped you in life though, but it's important not to imagine that everyone else experienced the same dilemmas as you have. Spinoza is an example of an atheistic philosopher who lived a very saintly life. Typically religion is the institution which encourages the pursuit of such lifestyles, but an individual with strong enough willpower can certainly do so independently.

As said, I myself do believe in the Divine, albeit of an abstract and impersonal sense. So I might understand you better than a common atheist would. But I make it a point not to project my own psychological constitution onto people around me, which only leads to us misunderstanding eachother's unique perspectives on the world.

>>14055409
If you could provide support for said theistic belief within Buddhism's scriptural canon, I'd be able to believe you. Otherwise, I have never encountered Shakyamuni Buddha claiming either the existence of a supreme deity nor the importance of following it. Different Buddhist cultures have injected their own folk traditions into the philosophy, so I can believe that your mother and her culture may hold to such views. But if Shakyamuni Buddha has not explicitly stated it, or implicitly suggested it, then I would not consider it canonical Buddhism, which is what I am speaking of.

>>14055279
how many were guilty but kept in their position?

>>14055494
Innocent until proven guilty.

>>14055248
So, say, if God were to stop existing, the good things would remain good?

>>14055362
>I was definitely an atheist guys I swear

>>14055445
>not believing his metaphysical assertions
Yeah, but that's just dumb in light of the philosophical tradition of Pythagoras, the greeks, the hindus and the buddhists. All of those philosophical traditions point towards a Being of unity that lends being to all that is.
>he has no obligation to either become a believing Christian or to accept Christian metaphysics as correct
Of course you don't have an obligation. The entire point of this world is freedom. You are free to accept or reject good, and as a result you will become something. Whether you believe that this result will have eternal consequences is up to you, but why would you assume the best (no afterlife, or no possible hell)?
People who prepare for the worst (afterlife with the possibility of hell) are getting the job done, and they are more driven, not to mention, more rational. Assuming that everything will jsut be fine is naive.
Some atheists may be able to live saintly lives, but you can't possibly suggest that a vast majority of people would ever be capable of doing that without religion, not to mention that the Buddha himself says, that perfect morality is a raft you use towards the other side. But the point is reaching the other side. Morality doesn't exists in and of itself, it has a telos.
>>14055525
If God stopped existing (an impossibility in and of itself) all of existence would collapse within a fraction of a moment.

>>14055525
Yes, if the rewards stayed in place. If Heaven no longer exists, then there is no reason to follow Jesus’ example. It would be better to indulge in worldly pleasures and love this world as much as you can. You cannot serve two masters. If God somehow didn’t exist, then the world would be your master.

>>14055549
I was an atheist from 2012 to 2016.
It was the worst period of my life and I'm glad it's over.

>>14052673
Correct.

>>14052871
Consequences are the only true obligations. The 'need' is the consequence -- to survive, to flourish. It is not that survival is 'good' in some universal sense (values don't precede valuing agents), it is that only valuing agents who survive are in a position to decide what is 'good'.

>>14052983
'Reason' is our extensive capacity for abstraction, and it is very natural to us. In fact, it is the defining trait of humans in terms of our evolutionary success.

>>14054266
Hey everyone, it's Friedrich Jacobi!

>>14055377
Yeah I would expect the Catholic Church to vet all their priests to ensure that not a single one was a pedophile, and if one somehow slipped through they would be thoroughly punished and sent to jail -- not just sent away.
>state education is literally harsher on pedophiles than the catholic church

>>14055735
You are just spouting unrelated bullshit.
We just showed that Catholic clergy is less likely to be pedophilic, to which you insist that they are still shit tier compared to teachers, who have been shown to be more pedophilic.

>>14055805
No retard, if a teacher is a pedophile they're fired and sent to jail. If a priest is a pedophile they just move.

>>14055822
>implying the church has jurisdiction in these matters
>implying that the church conducts it's own investigations fully independent of secular bodies
This is your brain on blind hatred

>>14055577
Is there nothing wrong with murder except that God forbids it? And with rape? And these things are forbidden only arbitrarily, you say? Then in what way is God wise?

>>14055931
Murder is wrong because it takes you farther from God and it also harms another person. Same with rape. Every sin you commit, damages you, and debases you. That is why these are forbidden.

>>14055951
Are not harm, damage, and debasement loathsome regardless of whether or not God exists?

>>14055244
>the law is comparable to an all knowing all powerful supernatural being
based theist retard

>>14055931
Those sins are bad regardless. They usually lead to negative consequences in this life as well as the next. Someone who goes through such actions obviously has a malformed spirit, and is more concerned with worldly things

Daily reminder it has been empirically proven religiosity stifles scientific innovation.

https://www.princeton.edu/~rbenabou/papers/Religion%20December%201g_snd.pdf
http://www.nber.org/papers/w21052.pdf

Daily reminder the overwhelming majority of leading scientists are atheists

https://www.nature.com/articles/28478
https://evolution-outreach.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/1936-6434-6-33

Daily reminder most philosophers are atheists

https://philpapers.org/surveys/results.pl

Daily reminder religious people are less intelligent according to dozens of studies.

http://diyhpl.us/~nmz787/pdf/The_Relation_Between_Intelligence_and_Religiosity__A_Meta-Analysis_and_Some_Proposed_Explanations.pdf

Daily reminder religious people are less educated

https://www.economist.com/news/international/21623712-how-education-makes-people-less-religiousand-less-superstitious-too-falling-away

Religious people are literally a lesser breed of human

>>14055582
I was a Christian from 2006 to 2010. It was the worst period of my life and I'm glad it's over.

>>14055973
No. If God doesn't exist, your ideas of good or bad are just opinions, and if someone disagrees, his opinion is just as valid.
You can't really tell someone that it's wrong to kill people if that is what makes him happy and fulfilled, if all you have are opinions. Without God there is no right and wrong, there are only preferences.

>>14055892
Based fucking retard
Where the fuck have you been the last 20 years?
The church has made tremendous efforts to protect pedophiles among their ranks all over the globe. Get a grip.

>>14056029
Who cares?

>>14056048
Prove it

>>14056045
>If God doesn't exist, your ideas of good or bad are just opinions
Citation needed

>>14056023
yeah but i would beat you in a fight you atheist nerd faggot. and nice ‘studies’ you midwit

>>14056056
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Catholic_Church_sexual_abuse_cases

>>14056060
Post body

>>14055409
Anon, please show me the scriptural basis for the supreme deity of Buddhism, and that Buddhist ethics are as such because of their reflecting this Being's laws or will. Until then, I will stand by the claim that Buddhism is non-theistic. I have asked you once before but no response was given. I'm not asking this rudely, but for my own education, since I have never previously heard that conception of Buddhism before.

Why the fuck is this thread still up?

>>14052587
The same way christians believe in god

>>14056045
You cannot demonstrate that objective morality requires a God/Being to be true (rather than an abstract system or domain or the like, in which such claims are grounded), nor that Yahweh's laws correspond to said objective morality.

>>14052602
If all the world turned into atheists like you then do you think there would there still be laws or would everyone silently prefer to just keep the status quo more or less? Not trying to sound condescending, it's just something I think about a lot.

I'm surprised I have to say this, but the priests who do the abusing thing don't exactly believe in Christian ethics. A pretty large percentage of priests is actually atheistic and joined the Church because it is a "good beard".

In my country, they don't even read Aquinas, they only study Liberation Theology.

>>14052602
Oh anon

>>14052922
Religion is rooted in tradition, and is therefore anticultural; Spirituality is the root of culture, and is therefore radical.

>>14056228
Not him, but since there would still be laws in place, and even some antisocial people like that anon try to preserve order, things would not go to shit immediately. They would be markedly worse but the US would still be a country. What would mostly likely happen is that society degenerates fairly slowly through the political process. Imagine if politicians were even worse than they are now.
I just realized you were asking about the entire world, not just the US. I have no idea there, but I think it would be worse.

>>14055507
can't be proven guilty if the Church moves you to the Vatican, big brain thinking

>>14052602
spbp

>>14056582
>muh conspiracy theories
>nuuu the vatican has 800 pedophiles in there
you are ridocolous

>>14056126
You can't demonstrate that we can have any objective morals without God either. If there is no objective standard, there is no morality, there is only opinions and preferences.
>>14056058
I dont need to cite anything, you didn't prove that your opinions on morality are factual, in fact you can't.
>>14056074
Yes I used that article to prove that the catholic clergy is almost pristine when it comes to pedophilia, whats your point?

>>14056126
So you are basically arguing fo an impersonal God then.

>>14056900
are you actually denying that the Catholic Church moved pedophiles to the Vatican to harbor them from justice? whew boi

>>14056126
Actually it just makes sense.
A moral claim is either true or false.
And the only valid form of deriving truth value for a moral claim is through a supreme judge, and the supreme judge has to be unchanging, uncontingent and eternal, otherwise the judgement it makes is not objective, aka not true.
If you don't jave a supreme judge, you have a bunch of transient human beings with their transient opinions, which are not grounded in anything more than their own subjective experience, as such morality will become the lowest common denominator of the consensus.

>>14056126
According to what then, are the standards of objective morality?

>>14056916
>I dont need to cite anything
You claim theism is needed for moral realism, the onus is on you to prove that claim.

> Yes I used that article to prove that the catholic clergy is almost pristine when it comes to pedophilia, whats your point?
You’re mentally deficient. The proof that the church has protected pedophiles within itself is unquestionable.
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/08/14/us/catholic-church-sex-abuse-pennsylvania.html

>>14057038
0.2% of clergy is pedophilic
That is 10 times better than average schoolteachers.
I know it hurts that you embarassed yourself, but sometimes you just have to learn humility and apologize for your mistakes.

>You claim theism is needed for moral realism, the onus is on you to prove that claim.
See >>14056981

>>14052688
Based.

>>14056916
objective ≠ universal

>>14057080
How so?

>>14056981
>>14057080

>>14057089
What is your point retard?

>>14057080
Ummm, sweatie... It actually is the same.
If something is objectively true, it's universally true.

>>14057075
Yeah, you’re mentally deficient. What we were discussing was cover up of pedophiles among the church, not whatever crude estimate of pedophilia rate compared to schoolteachers you can come up with. Show me one school, or any human organization for that matter, that has put as much effort to protect pedophiles as the church. You can’t, because it has literally never happened.

And your “proof” that theism is needed for moral realism is outright embarrassing. You’re begging the question by assuming that Divine Command theory is true, which is the weakest moral theory there is. You fucking amateur.

>>14056981
>as such morality will become the lowest common denominator of the consensus
What do you mean by this exactly?

>>14057085
If I say it is night here, is that objectively true or universally true?

>>14057103
>Yeah, you’re mentally deficient.
No u

>>14057124
No arguments left, eh?

>>14057115
Exactly what I wrote down.
>>14057117
Both.

>>14057129
There is no point in engaging with retards.

>>14057093
>*fwoooosh*

>>14057097
Citation needed. It may be objectively true that for you, coffee is the best ice cream flavour (it produces a pleasure for you unequaled by the others). That doesn't it make it universally true (it isn't true of everyone). This is so basic.

>>14052587
Because morals are more subjective than not.

>>14057103
But theism is needed for moral realism. Provide proof that you can have moral realism without theism.

>>14057137
Is this how you’re trying to save face? Lmao

Anyone reading this can see how plainly wrong you’re, and how incapable you’re are of defending your position.
But it’s okay, sweetie, we’re anonymous here.

>>14057143
Morality =/= preference

>>14057132
How both? Is it night time for someone on a different planet, or on the antipode of this one?

>>14057137
Indeed.

>>14057153
Restating your claim is not an argument.
Like I said, the burden of proof is on you.

>>14057157
>be desperate to paint the catholics as pedophiles even though they are literally better than laymen
>looking good
Actually you are the one looking like a clown here

>>14057132
>Exactly what I wrote down.
Then how christianity values aren't the product of the lowest common denomiator?

>>14057162
He didn't restate a claim. Prove that you can have objective morals without God.

>>14056951
Not him, and not denying that it happens, but understanding why it happens is an important facet here.

>>14057159
So you claim. Back up a moment though.

It can be objectively true that coffee flavoured ice cream is the best flavour for one person, but not others. Objectively, but not universally true. Do you understand the distinction now?

>>14057165
Because the Christian God exists and gave a moral code that was not a result of people voting on whether they liked buttsecks or not.

>>14057103
>Show me one school, or any human organization for that matter, that has put as much effort to protect pedophiles as the church.
Hollywood.

>>14057103
>Show me one school, or any human organization
Female pedophiles are let off the hook almost universally.

>>14057171
>He didn't restate a claim.
He did, read the post again.

Most ethical theories don’t need theism to work, therefore, unless you show them all to be wrong, theism isn’t needed for moral realism.
You have an extremely hard task ahead, as no christian apologist has ever been able to do it.

>>14057178
>>>/x/
>>14057181
Didn’t know there was a worldwide organization of female pedophiles.

>>14057176
Not even God follow that moral code, he even changed a few times

>>14057171
Don't you first have to define what morals are? I'm guessing you've arbitrarily decided that for yourself, and so will find an answer which reconciles objective morality with secularism but not your particular definition of 'morals' to be unsatisfactory.

The phenomenon of morality can not come from basal or social compulsions. Doing things merely to avoid punishment (Hell, jail, social condemnation, etc.) or to receive reward (Heaven, social gratification, etc.) can not be seen as the product of moral contemplation. This type of cognition is amoral, as it takes nothing more than pleasure-calculations to deduce a course of action. Moral cognition requires first a suspension from immediate circumstance to silence the primitive cognition. Then, one must assess the situation in terms of goals. Once the situation is assessed in these terms, any decision that is made is "moral" so far as it coincides with those goals, and any decision is "immoral" if it goes against them. With this understanding of morality, an atheist can have morals so far as they have goals.

>>14056916
You're correct, I cannot demonstrate it. But I'm not claiming that either, merely stating that objective morality is the subject being spoken of, and anything stated subsequently of it requires an argument for it. Whether it be an impersonal God, a personal God, an abstract realm, or what have you.

>>14056947
Well, in my personal theology I consider Consciousness to be God. I believe that one's behaviors correspond to one's level of Consciousness. And I believe that Consciousness itself has the condition of absoluteness and objectivity i.e mind-independent. The reason that you your mind can doubt anything besides existence/knowing/consciousness itself is because the mind is grounded within said consciousness, thus making the latter "true independent of mind". This doesn't mean that I consider there to always be a perfect moral system we should adhere to, since the nature of any physical environment and behavior within it is constrained by physical limitation. For example, I would regard "Love" as an objective moral absolute, one that is unchanging and will always be fundamentally superior to any other kind of behavior, because Love itself is the most fundamental state of Consciousness, in my view. That said, the "expression" of Love within physical reality can be manifold, such that in normal circumstances would result in you hugging another person or helping them carry something, but in another would result in you having to end their life ex. mercy killing.

>>14056981
Biblical morality cannot be proven to correspond to those objectively true propositions though. And especially not the likes of many laws from the Old Testament. The Judeo-Christian God can't even be the fixed, unchanging standard of morality since His own laws have already been changed from the Old to the New covenants. Genocide, rape, and slavery would remain objectively moral, and one couldn't say that "Jesus nullified the previous code" because that misunderstands the nature of objective morality, which is to be immutable. If the laws can change, then the lawgiver is not the objective, immutable standard, and it's as arbitrary as following societal laws. This is even entertaining the notion that the laws were handed down by the Supreme Good, rather than from a potential devil, or simply a collection of men's opinions.

>>14057012
I have my basic views on the nature of Consciousness, which I've elaborated some of in my top post. But beyond that, I really don't know friend. It's a really difficult subject, which is among the most fundamental in philosophy. If you research the history of societies, both yours and others, you'll observe clearly changing views on ideal human behavior. It's a fascinating area, and I'd recommend researching it. I used to naively think all of my own set of moral beliefs, which aligned with those of my culture, corresponded to the objectively correct variety of them - until I looked into the above, and realized how unlikely that would be.

>>14057163
Do you even grasp what we are discussing?
Show me one secular organization that protected hundreds of pedophiles in Pennsylvania alone.

>>14057103
Dude I'm not even Christian but no need for such words man. The more seriously people take these discussions, the more we all suffer. Let's just be kinder to eachother regardless of anything else.

>>14057161
I think he means that another person could not dispute it being night there. The claim is true from any vantage.

>>14057277
>Let's just be kinder to eachother

Did polytheists not have their own moral code? How do monotheists reconcile that?

>>14057256
>Biblical morality
God could still be true whether Christianity is true or false desu.

>Love
It's just chemicals in your brain if God doesn't exist. Its a transient state, nothing more, and no more of a guiding principle than wanting to eat or going to sleep. On what basis do you elevate Love above all other states?

>>14057320
Most polytheists are just monotheists in disguise.
Yes, really.

>>14054549
based

>>14052587
how do atheists believe in his thoughts?.

>>14057339
>question is about polytheists
>talks about monotheists
uh

>>14057320
All polytheistic systems had a chief deity who was the judge, the boss, the guy everyone else followed. Hinduism, hellenism, hell, native americans had an overdeity from whom lesser deities derived their powers and portfolios.

>>14052602
Thank you for being honest and confirming my exact argument against atheism.

>>14057361
Sorry, but holy trinities and archangels aren't the same as polytheism. There may be a king among a pantheon, but a pantheon is still an entirely different premise. Each god in a pantheon is the ruler of a realm and employs a different moral code as is fitting for that realm. There is no "realm of all realms." The king god doesn't override all the others' domains, even if conflict ensues between gods and one triumphs.

>>14057348
Polytheism is more like anthropomorph animism desu...

>>14057377
>Each god in a pantheon is the ruler of a realm
Yeah and all those rulers listen like good boiz when top God speaks.
Zeus rules the heavens, Hades ans Poseidon are his bitches.

>>14057330
It wouldn't be the Christian God, though. And I'm not a materialist, so I don't consider Love a "chemical reaction" just as I don't consider Beauty a chemical reaction. These are, in my opinions, regions or states within deeper, transcendental levels of our own consciousness. And as said, I believe in the view of Advaita Vedanta, which is that God is Consciousness itself, rather than an external creator. I recommend reading into it if you wish.

>>14057377
>archangels aren't the same as polytheism
They kinda are though.
Hindu polytheism calls god Devas, but Devas are just different manifestations and servants of the ultimate godhead, who is the real boss and source of everything. These Devas are finite creatures, who actually die and enter the cycle of rebirth.

>>14057381
Other gods sometimes defy and conflict with Zeus even if they heed his calls. The point you're missing is that no god has absolute power in a pantheon, they are understood as having limits as to what domains they are meant to control.

>>14057381
>Yeah and all those rulers listen like good boiz when top God speaks
>Norse apocalypse is a disagreement between the gods

>>14057395
Okay, where does consciousness come from?

>>14057397
Yet all polytheistic religions eventually developed the idea of the Monad. Why?

>>14057413
No culture has a right to immortality. Eventually the men who were strong enough to sustain it grow old and perish.

>>14057289
Which is what makes it objectively true (independent of the observer), but not universally true (it isn't night time everywhere at once). The terms are not equivalent.

>>14055362
>I'm a faggot who can't control themselves without the threat of being grounded.

>>14057434
In my understanding, objectivity and universality are co-conditions, one being impossible without the other. If something is true independent of the observer (objective), then no other perspective or case can deny it either (universal). But I think you mean universal as in physical universality, in which case you're right. Or maybe my earlier definition of universality is superfluous. I don't know.

>>14057410
It is the necessary ground of reality itself, which is eternal and uncreated. In my view. You, as consciousness, have always existed - it is merely that you are presently incarnate in a physical lifeform, and therefore live under a veil of forgetting your eternal, transcendental nature. The purpose of the spiritual path is essentially the remembrance of what you really are. In my opinion.

>>14052587
Read Nietzsche and the transfiguartion of values.
>>14052599
Spinoza wasn't an atheist.

>>14052602
This. I dont know why religitards are so concerned with morals. Even when there is no religion a functioning society will come up with some set of rules that wil stop it devolving into anarchy.

>>14057176
human beings literally interpret whole sections of that "moral code" away, meaning that morality is absolutely what people "vote" it to be

>>14057364
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Appeal_to_consequences

>>14054548
centrism is a reaction to a reaction, there is no escape.

>>14056228
The world is already like this. A righteous man is hard to find.

>>14052657
>>compelled to do things or else face punishment
Are you seriously so retarded/under-read that you think all theists act as they do solely out of a fear of hell?

>>14052688
The virtue ethics of Socrates, Aristotle etc. was in the context of classical paganism though not monotheism. Also the Euthyphro dilemma exists.

>>14057103
Do not accept his 0.2%. The RCC lawyers admitted to 5%.

>>14052587
Simple, is implies ought.

>>14052587
The Law of God is written in everyone's heart, even atheists.

>>14058579
Virtue ethics is based on the belief in a single highest good.

>>14052587
Using moral systems that don't take God into account. You do realize that you can account of an ethical theory from the top down without God right? And this comes from a theist.

>>14057320
Polytheisum is just subjective morality with a different name.

>>14052800
That would be really based.

>>14052587
Morals seem pretty spooky tbqh

1: Moral statements are commandments.
2: For objective moral statements to exists, there needs to exist an universal commander with universal authority, which everyone calls god.
3: Objective moral facts exists.
--------------------------------------------------------
C: God exists.

>>14058949
>Objective moral facts exists.

>>14052909
you can't have morals if you don't believe in god. stop attacking me just because you know you are evil and i am right and exposing your evil nature

>>14060130
how did monotheists have morals before the invention of monotheism

>>14060129
not him but, they do.

>>14060155
Prove it.

>>14058949
>divine command theory

>>14060149
they had a different set of moral values, there's no going back.

>>14060194
but how could they have morality before the invention of monotheistic god?

>>14060155

So slavery is okay, then? Because the Bible doesn't forbid it

>>14060234
>hur dur let's try to point out a contradiction in their argument to undermine it

>>14060253
hmmmm

>>14052638
agree completely aside from the needless use if god.
practically the same as the morals if religious people, honestly.
>>14052587
how do priests rape children? how did holy men commit the inquisition?

>>14052587
Why do theists need fear of eternal damnation in order to act humanely towards other people

Atheists who are too dumb to understand nihilism are the biggest moralfags of all. Post-christian libtard socially enforced morality is all they have.

>>14060343
Its not about acting humane, it's about acting or something outside of themselves.
Eternal damnation is literally the only reason to avoid being a dickhead. Why shouldn't I just kill random people if it gives me joy and I can get away with it?
>>14060250
>live in wageslave world
>hurddurrr slavery bad and christians are bad cause they are ok with slavery
>>14060130
Based and breadpilled. Atheism is just a giant cope about draghing everyone down to their own level because they can't into selflessness.
>>14060129
Yes they do.
>>14058916
>You do realize that you can account of an ethical theory from the top down without God right? And this comes from a theist.
Prove it.

>>14052587
They either don't or have a knock-off morality system from a religion
>>14052610
This basically, non-theist Christians. Most of the morals and general do good shit but without any of spiritual life

>>14060358
you're absolutely right but somehow highly unlikeable

>>14055244
>thinking this constitutes you being moral
he never said that cucko

>>14054473
shut up bitch. lit is not for femoid athiest dykes any more

>>14056060
Post jawline

test

Atheists are the most moral of everyone because they have to be because they don't have any "righteousness" to cling to.
Christians are already righteous by identity, i.e. they have a baseline righteousness just by being christian, which allows them to be dicks as they wish.

Everyone is looking for a slave morality narcissistic feminine peasant power over others, in the form of righteousness.
Christian are on the fast track, atheists take the hard route.

A parallel can be made to old money and new money. Old money doesn't need to prove itself. New money will flash and bash and be gaudy and gory as possible in it's desire to become accepted.

"Character is what you are when no one is watching"
Satre's concept of "the gaze" which influences actions is all-encompassing. You're either being watched by God or by Society. And god damn do we will in a fucken society.
The final redpill is that everyone wants to be watched. We NEED a Gaze, even though it forces us to be "unauthentic". (Being authentic would disastrous, people are retarded fags deep down.)

>>14060535
>Eternal damnation is literally the only reason to avoid being a dickhead. Why shouldn't I just kill random people if it gives me joy and I can get away with it?

Most people are not sociopaths who would derive pleasure from murdering others. People who aren't gravely mentally ill or grossly ignorant to the point of megalomanic narcissism have empathy for others. These people do not need an omnipotent authority figure threatening them to behave morally because they have theory of mind and basic human decency brought about by living communally in society with other people.

>>14060535
>Atheism is just a giant cope about draghing everyone down to their own level because they can't into selflessness
word

>>14060678
>Most people are not sociopaths who would derive pleasure from murdering others.
You have to be an idiot to think that only mentally ill people would derive from harming others. Vengeance is something, that most people crave.
Insults, real or perceived, will always be a source of vengefulness in every society, and it will always escalate.

>>14060697
>derive satisfaction

>>14060697
Seek professional help before you hurt someone or yourself mate.

>>14060535
>Why shouldn't I just kill random people if it gives me joy and I can get away with it?
The answer is that the group that contains your DNA will be out competed by groups who don't kill each other. The penalty is your genetic line ceasing to exist.

>>14052587
By living in cognative dissonance.

>>14052587
They're taken from judeochristianity and the feelings and reason inside themselves afforded by god
They're driving gods car saying how amazing it is and how great of a driver they are and just acting like God didn't build it and they don't owe him 3.50 for the gas.

Objective morality can't derive from a transcendental entity. So where do christians get their morals?

The way I see it is that the world gets better if we all work together. I help you, you help me, we both prosper. One of us breaks that contract, the other has no reason not to as well, we both suffer.

Morality is innate

>>14061929
>They're taken from judeochristianity
in the modern era, they're not, at least in civilised countries. for example, we treat women more or less equally, we treat animals better, we don't stone people for saying jehovah etc etc
if your morality was taken from "judeochristian" sources- well you wrote that on saturday, so death to you for breaking the sabbath

>>14055132
I don't think it's really about that.
I'm not sure but I think it might be that the religious wonder how atheists are moral without a strong sense of group identity or a sense of "I and I."

I think what this issue really comes down to is an inability of the neurotypical to understand the moral thinking driving those with cognitive social deficits and vice-versa.
Because those with cognitive social deficits make up a disproportionate amount of atheists and especially the loud annoying antitheists,
Because natural social instincts encourage bonding into religious like groups and encourage a teleological bias.

I have autism and probably have alexythemia an internal muting and confusion of feelings.
I guess it's unfortunate but I don't really feel love for my family.
I don't love my mother, my father or my brother.
They're just strangers who I happen to live in the same home as me.

I think the religious assumption must be that if someone is missing an instinctual Ethics of Care https://www.iep.utm.edu/care-eth/ they must then follow some perverse Ethics of Hate but this is obviously silly.
Would you just randomly macerate a stranger's baby you found abandoned?
I don't love my family but I don't hate them either.
You can't hate a stranger anymore than you can hate the sea or the wind.

I think the religious question might be: How can you be really good without an instinctive personifying of the other?
And I'm really not sure I can.
But that doesn't make me a baby eating monster it just makes me kind of tired and bitter and a loner.

>>14052587
do onto others as you would like them to do onto you

i learned this in first grade, where did you grow up?

>>14063765
also, empathy

>>14063765
>>14063776

also this, >>14060646
morality in fear of punishment or in hope of reward is false morality. it is actually self serving, selfishness.
which begs the question, how can you claim to be moral when you are doing it for someone/someones else, and not just for it's own sake?

>>14060646

What If I cut god's eyes out. I need not your false lights for I am what I am,even in the dark, for I am of the light

>>14052933
vixy

>>14052933
is

>>14052933
worst

>>14052933
girl

>>14055629

You again assume that survival is the ultimate goal, without any reason to do so. Yes, the person might want to survive due to evolutionary programming but that does not constitute a morality.

>>14060129
They do.
Colors exist, no? Tastes exist, no?

>>14052763
Because it is how we treat children anon. Are you a child?

>>14063765
I would like others to not restrain themselves in front of me.

>>14054194
>people are fundamentally good
What a ridiculous notion to believe.

>>14054194
If by good you mean innocent, then yes.

Bumped so this can hit bump limit and die already

>>14063765
Children don't learn effectively from being merely told what they ought to think or do; they need a role model to imitate. The story of Jesus is the model of this philosophy. Even if you could possibly succeed in getting this principle ingrained into a child's head at the level of a believer, doing so would only necessarily idealize Jesus's personality/spirit, which defeats atheism.

>>14065983
we aren't talking in terms of learning. just in justification for morality in the absence of god. and i claim it is fairly simple:

1. do onto others as you would want them to do onto you
2. empathy

>>14052587
If you only act moral because you believe in God, you're a psychopath.

If you cannot tell good from bad without the written rules of someone, you're retarded.

Even some animals show empathy and non selfish behavior because they know an empathetic society works better and more efficient for everyone.

Steve Harvey explained it best right hand man.

humanists just whatever is the best for muh humans because it ultimately ends up protecting them.
the rest just do what's best for productivity

>>14052610
>Most atheists today are just non-theistic christians.
This is 100% the answer to OP's question. What they did is they copied the moral code from Christianity and then pretend that religion is superfluous.

>>14066046
Empathy has nothing to do with morals. It's just a reactionary mechanism in humans that helps with bonding and keeping your closest environment in check. You can't actually extrapolate morals from that, it simply doesn't scale.

>>14066140
if that moral code does not rely upon god, what makes it religious?

>>14066153
>Empathy has nothing to do with morals.
uhh, are you retarded or a sociopath?

bump limit pls, fuck all of you

>>14066161
What is the cause of empathy?

>>14066153

If you think empathy is just a reactionary mechanism, you really seem to have a problem.

>>14066176
why is the cause relevant?

>>14052909
hello Brian from Family Guy

>>14066154
The way it was conceived. Religion isn't made up by some dude and then that's it. It took thousands of years of iterations until it was condensed to what it is today.

>>14066950
yeah, and that was all done by people, in the absence of any divine intervention. what does it have to do with religion?

>>14066161
I didn't say I have no empathy. I said empathy has nothing to do with morals. Now, on some levels they happen to coincide, as empathy is a built-in instinct to nail at least the most fundamental non-selfish actions that benefit us (i.e. caring for our family and friends). There are plenty of examples when this is not the case, it usually happens when things scale beyond your family and friends and things become more complex. If you think empathy is equal to ethics, you haven't understood anything about ethics.

>>14066189
What else would it be?

>>14066971
Think harder

>>14067033
or just answer me

>>14060646
So considering how majority of the population is religious atheists crave theistic gaze which will judge them?

>>14067112
wtf does this MEAN?

>>14064934
Why not? And I'm talking about collective survival, not individual. What we call 'morality' is simply the abstract formalization of cooperative social behaviours.