[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports ] [ become a patron ] [ status ]
2023-11: Warosu is now out of extended maintenance.

/lit/ - Literature

View post   
File: 207 KB, 408x518, 03EE7097-CA17-431E-8FF3-995442814F96.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
14317061 No.14317061 [Reply] [Original]

How does morality hold up without the concept of a God that ordains it?

>> No.14317062

>>14317061
it doesn't

>> No.14317144

>>14317062
Then why are there so many “atheists” that think it does?

>> No.14317153

>>14317061
Maybe with society or humanity in the place of god? Faith in something greater than ourselves is probably required

>> No.14317171

>>14317144
it's a cope
their arguments for it are genuinely terrible

>> No.14317210

>>14317153
The idea that society and humanity are of central importance is derived from religion. Your essentially rediscovering Kantianism.

Even if you've never been exposed to Christianity your entire world-view is heavily indebted to it.

>> No.14317369

>>14317153
>Maybe with society or humanity in the place of god?

Yeah, it doesn't work. People are pieces of shit and will eat each other if this life is all there is.

>> No.14317435

What's the best reading on the relationship between loss of faith and loss of morality? I've already read Spengler.

>> No.14317464

By the community, people, person who actually need it.

>> No.14317511

>>14317061
It doesn't hold up with that concept either.

>> No.14317550

>>14317062
fpbp
No God - no morality.
Atheists have preferences and whenever they moralfag they do it for support or virtuesignaling.
>>14317369
>People are pieces of shit and will eat each other if this life is all there is
This.

>> No.14317680

>>14317210
fuck off, I considered myself important before I learned what religion is. it's only a small step from there - accepting, even provisionally, that others share a common nature with me.

>> No.14318155

>>14317550
>No God - no morality.
God forgiving sins = No morality.

>> No.14318175

>>14317061
It’s called ethics.

Now how do you explain all the immoral moralists out there. Firmly believing in god and still molesting children.

>> No.14318185

>>14317061
Pretty well actually. Divine command theory is as bad as moral anti-realism. Both say that what is 'moral' is at best just what someone somewhere declares to be moral. That's not real morality. Just a word of advice though, stay away from people who say morality can be reduced to psychology, or derived from pleasure/pain or self-interest, or otherwise. You have the choice of picking between Kantianism and moral intuitionism (like G. E. Moore-type stuff). Everything else is crap.

>> No.14318394

>>14318155
>implying that there is no justice being done in remorse

>> No.14318397

>>14317062
>based
>redpilled
>first post
/thread

>> No.14318417

>>14317061
>How does morality hold up without the concept of a God that ordains it?

Is the moral law good because God chooses it, or does God choose said law because it is good?
In the first case there is no real moral law, since God's will would not offer any grounding for morality.
In the second case there's a moral law, which will alway apply, regardless of God's commands. In this case we would not need God for morality.

>> No.14318468

>>14318394
Of course there is no justice being done in remorse.
God forgiving sins = No morality.

>> No.14318482

>>14318394
Saving souls = No morality

>> No.14318483

Now it might be civil obligation, but isn't the bedrock (I.E first humans) of it all simply just a matter of mutual cooperation for preservation? Killing someone is immoral because it weakens the group, thus weakening one's chances of survival

>> No.14319013

>>14317062
You have no conscience

>> No.14319064

>>14319013
Having a conscience is not contingent on the existence of an absolute morality.

>> No.14319175

It does if you lie to yourself and take the "but morality is whatever is best for all humans :)" pill. If you're honest, though... it doesn't.

>> No.14319199

>>14317062
/thread

>> No.14319215

>>14317061
Morality without practice is brainlet cope. There is no need of morality when you already have ethics.

Also this --> >>14317062

>> No.14319227

>>14317171
>their arguments for it are genuinely terrible
And yet your kind absolutely refuses to refute them. How convenient.

>> No.14319234

>>14317511
only good answer itt

>> No.14319242

>>14319227
I can do it in one sentence.
You can not derive an "ought" from an "is".

>> No.14319245

>>14317061
idk
hard objectavism
determinism
positivist ethics
transcendentalism

though all of these things hae a certian driver to them that one could label as "god"

>> No.14319254

>>14319227
Because it’s like playing chess with a pigeon, it’s impossible to refute incoherent arguments. Every argument for being moral in the absence of *long term* consequences for the self come down to “wtf what are you a psycho who wishes they could kill people?” Or “we socially evolved to be altruistic for tribe survival” which isn’t even an argument so much as a causal hypothesis for proto morality.

>> No.14319283
File: 80 KB, 716x555, arguing with christians.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
14319283

>>14319254
>playing chess with a pigeon
Christians can't meme.

>> No.14319542 [DELETED] 

>>14317061
How does [ethico]morality hold up without the concept of a God that ordains it?
In ignorance and temporalness.

>> No.14319552

>>14317061
>How does [ethico]morality hold up without the concept of a God that ordains it?
Blindly: in ignorance and temporalness.

>> No.14319563

I agree that belief in God is the necessary basis for all morality. That being said, consider that certain traits like empathy evolved for the benefit of our species and laws like "do not kill" often ascribed to God are reflections of these evolutionary traits.

>> No.14319609

God is the process of introspection
The process of introspection is the only truth we have
Read Hegel

>> No.14319618

>>14317061
>How does morality hold up without the concept of a God that ordains it?
Cause and effect
/thread.

>> No.14320786

How does divine command theory hold up to the Euythphro problem?

>> No.14320847

>>14317680
youve inherited so much though, youre a far cry away from some "state of nature" that people can either assume are fundamentally good, or bad.

>> No.14320863

>>14317061
I want to racemix with this central asian(?) woman so bad.
FUCK /pol/ and FUCK the white race.

>> No.14321056

>>14317061
The objectivity of consciousness is where we even intuited the concept of "objectivity" from, and consciousness objectively contains a spectrum consisting of higher and lower dimensions of itself. The lower dimensions, corresponding to the lower chakras, result in increasingly atomized, self-centric, deluded and hateful behaviors, while the higher regions of consciousness constitute those which accord to the absence of the former defilements, thereby recognizing the oneness of everything, and living in a state of love for all existence. Hence why people who take psychedelics like DMT report feeling an unconditional love surrounding them as they entered those higher states of consciousness, or of echoing metaphysical cliches like "everything is one" or poetic platitudes like "love is the key".

>> No.14321323
File: 19 KB, 500x590, 1536697993520.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
14321323

Morals are revealed in the very process of discourse. In choosing to argue my case to you, I tacitly concede that other courses of action (murdering you, stealing from you, raping you, torturing you, etc.) are not worth pursuing.