Are Atheists Potentially Morally Superior to Theists?

[Danmark]

The proposition is that atheists have the potential of being morally superior to theists because to the extent the atheist does good works, he does them because he wants to, because she thinks it right. Whereas the theist acts out of religious necessity or compulsion; the threat of hell or deprivation of heaven.

[Artie]

Your claim that 'everyone' gets their morality from culture is meant as a platitude or a equalizer. But its not the case when we have a Holy Book, a clear and established set of principles and standards, and clergy and peers that hold us to task.

The Muslims and Hindus also get their moral standards from their holy books just like you. Would you say that following all moral standards from all holy books is good or is it just your holy book that is special?

It is good as you say that you have "a Holy Book, a clear and established set of principles and standards, and clergy and peers that hold you to task." That is why religion evolved in the first place so that people without the ability to differentiate between right and wrong can be kept in check.

[Danmark]

If you still don't believe Gods existence after watching that video, it can rather be looked upon as denial instead.

Well I suppose it could be looked at as denial or anything else you want to suppose. This stuff is only frightening to those who believe.
I don't mean to offend, but it is laughable to those who do not.

When I was in Japan, teaching English, some how my students discovered that my walk home from class one night would take me thru a graveyard. They could not believe I would take that route. I asked them why.

They thought I was crazy not to believe in and fear the spirits there.

Would you? I would guess you would not. Neither did I. I thought it amusing. Nothing more.

When you believe in the supernatural you have much more to fear.
Why go there?

I'd rather go to graveyards, especially at night. Good place to sleep without worrying about people bothering you.

[Danmark]

That is interesting because I have debated many atheists on many forums, and time and time again that all atheism is the belief that there is no God and nothing else. Ergo, how can 'nothing else' equate to a fundamentally sound moral code?

A fundamentally sound moral code is derived from logic, reason and common sense, altruism, empathy, compassion, love, respect, conscience, ethics, the Golden Rule etc etc. If you don't have these qualities you must listen to a moral (religious) teacher or (religious) book and just obey what he says which is why religion evolved.

Indeed, that is exactly what the ten commandments do for the faithful every Sunday when they walk in and take communion and receive the atonement of Jesus Christ - it is an examination of our actions against those standards and an honest assessment of how we are doing against them. Over time, goal setting, initiative, effort, etc. can result in real change for people against those standards.

True. It is vitally important for moral people and human society as a whole that some people who might not have logic, reason and common sense, altruism, empathy, compassion, love, respect, conscience, ethics, the Golden Rule etc etc. at least follow what their moral religious teachers tell them is moral. Because if they had these qualities in the first place, why would they need somebody to teach them morals?

Oh, so fundamentally sound moral codes are the result of logic ... which atheists claim ... but results in zero applicable published standards or doctrines?

You then turn around and claim that one that WAS created, and widely revered by many very intelligent people, is worthless ... because of its very act of creation?

Well, then, as you have declared it both easy to do and so poorly done in every other moral code in the world, I believe you have just set a rather high bar for yourself.

Good luck in creating the perfect moral code, one that will doubt be glorified as the THE SOLUTION to mankinds torment, and ... well, no doubt every knee will bow before the standards you are about to quite breathlessly and with apparent ease lay before us?

By all means, I await the enrapturing display of your logic that exceeds that all other attempts.

Fire away cowboy.

What is so difficult or morally or logically challenging about accepting the Golden Rule? I really don't understand the difficulty in understanding and accepting that we will all do better if we treat each other decently. Why would one think one has to invoke a command from some all powerful god to understand it?

I can even be morally neutral, amoral, and understand that all of us collectively will do better if we treat each other the way we would like to be treated; that we should enter this social contract voluntarily.

I don't understand why the believer in the supernatural is any more likely to get this idea than the one who denies the supernatural.

Belief in the supernatural is as likely to lead one astray as it is to lead one along the correct path. Let's suppose there are spirits. How do we judge their advice?

By whether they claim one of their spiritual cadre has materialized?
No. We would judge that spirit based on our own objective morality.
Does the spirit command us to kill an innocent? To steal? To injure?

Or does the spirit command us to be kind, to help, to love?

No, the choice of conduct is based on our own judgment about what is right, not by some spirit. It is we who must judge, rather than be victims of the whims of some supernatural agent.

[TheTruth101]

If you still don't believe Gods existence after watching that video, it can rather be looked upon as denial instead.

Well I suppose it could be looked at as denial or anything else you want to suppose. This stuff is only frightening to those who believe.
I don't mean to offend, but it is laughable to those who do not.

When I was in Japan, teaching English, some how my students discovered that my walk home from class one night would take me thru a graveyard. They could not believe I would take that route. I asked them why.

They thought I was crazy not to believe in and fear the spirits there.

Would you? I would guess you would not. Neither did I. I thought it amusing. Nothing more.

When you believe in the supernatural you have much more to fear.
Why go there?

I'd rather go to graveyards, especially at night. Good place to sleep without worrying about people bothering you.

You have to fear him to keep order. herirarchy is established in heavens as well as here on earth.

you have to fear him as you fear your boss at first day at work. You should strive to fear him because in th end, you will pass the test of eternity. In due meaning, consider it your bar exam.

What you are rather attempting is to get away from the Bar exam simply because you see no benefit right at the moment. You do study for your exam because the society is established and is visible for you to earn your survival if you pass the exam. However, you do not want to undergo suffering for God simply because to you, eternity is invisible therefore it dosent exist concluding to no benefits.

Danmark, is energy visible? or, is oxygen visible? or wind?

Its nature, and that is what God is all about, and he holds nature.

How do you think Fire exists in the first place? Its just Big Bang again and the nature created it? But wait, humans can make it, and wait, its made to keep us warm when its cold.

And wait, back in the days there were no heaters, but wait, back in the day there still was winter. So wait, without technology how can one be kept warm at night without the sun? Exactly, God gave us the elements for our surival from beggining of time.

[Artie]

Oh, so fundamentally sound moral codes are the result of logic ... which atheists claim ... but results in zero applicable published standards or doctrines?

You then turn around and claim that one that WAS created, and widely revered by many very intelligent people, is worthless ... because of its very act of creation?

Well, then, as you have declared it both easy to do and so poorly done in every other moral code in the world, I believe you have just set a rather high bar for yourself.

Good luck in creating the perfect moral code, one that will doubt be glorified as the THE SOLUTION to mankinds torment, and ... well, no doubt every knee will bow before the standards you are about to quite breathlessly and with apparent ease lay before us?

By all means, I await the enrapturing display of your logic that exceeds that all other attempts.

Fire away cowboy.

But why would I need to do that when it has already been done?
https://www.tanenbaum.org/blog/04/11/ce ... n-rule-day
The Golden Rule is a result of evolution and has been incorporated into practically every religion and other moral system in the world as a universal code for human moral behavior in societies. I don't need a god to tell me that The Golden Rule is a good rule to live by I can figure that out for myself. You need a god to tell you. Which is the difference between us in a nutshell.

[Artie]

What is so difficult or morally or logically challenging about accepting the Golden Rule? I really don't understand the difficulty in understanding and accepting that we will all do better if we treat each other decently. Why would one think one has to invoke a command from some all powerful god to understand it?

Those who don't understand it need to be taught by some religious authority figure and have a brain enough wired for belief so as to actually believe and live according to what the religious authority figure says. Which is why evolution provided some individuals with a brain wired for belief in the first place.

[TheTruth101]

Oh, so fundamentally sound moral codes are the result of logic ... which atheists claim ... but results in zero applicable published standards or doctrines?

You then turn around and claim that one that WAS created, and widely revered by many very intelligent people, is worthless ... because of its very act of creation?

Well, then, as you have declared it both easy to do and so poorly done in every other moral code in the world, I believe you have just set a rather high bar for yourself.

Good luck in creating the perfect moral code, one that will doubt be glorified as the THE SOLUTION to mankinds torment, and ... well, no doubt every knee will bow before the standards you are about to quite breathlessly and with apparent ease lay before us?

By all means, I await the enrapturing display of your logic that exceeds that all other attempts.

Fire away cowboy.

But why would I need to do that when it has already been done?
https://www.tanenbaum.org/blog/04/11/ce ... n-rule-day
The Golden Rule is a result of evolution and has been incorporated into practically every religion and other moral system in the world as a universal code for human moral behavior in societies. I don't need a god to tell me that The Golden Rule is a good rule to live by I can figure that out for myself. You need a god to tell you. Which is the difference between us in a nutshell.

As quoted,

You need a god to tell you. Which is the difference between us in a nutshell


The act of humbleness and obidience is the hardest thing one can achieve throughot their life. It is called climbing the ladder within the society. And only the highest people of moral standards can establish such acts for a lifetime.
As evident by the virtue of patience being a grounder for such acts, indeed patience is associated with maturity that of the society. The more patient you are, the better you turn out to be in the end. Simply look around you, the more patience you have as to your studies, the more belts or degrees will be added to you, and the more patience you have with your company, the more reliable you will be looked upon by your superiors in the end.

The reasoning one states under that quote can be seen as an immatre act of rebbeliousness. That quote instantly tells me one is under high school teenage I am mad my Father syndrome.


Learn to be an asker of things. Because when you ask, it is only you that will be benefit in the end.
It is not the mentality of taking that gets you up the ladder, it is the mentality of asking that gets you up the ladder. To propose is to declare a statement that you are in need, and through that exchange you will know of genuiness of another, and of hypocricy of another. Only through experience is one able to gain wisdom, and though a one or two will wave you off, in the end it will be you that will learn of adversity, and learn of geunine people that will truly be there for you in the times of need.

To ask a higher being of moral codes establishes a dependency as well as independency. Independency of the society that is visible and is hardest thing to overlook, and of dependency to the invisible, which is the hardest thing one can achieve, in due meaning, acquiring eternity. And to conclude, it is the ones with faith that take the matters of life twofold compared to the ones without a deity.

[Artie]

To ask a higher being of moral codes establishes a dependency as well as independency.

Precisely my point. People who understand and live by moral codes such as the Golden Rule because they have figured out themselves that it is in their and everybody's best interest don't need to ask a higher being for moral codes do they? Only those who don't have the mental capacity to figure this out for themselves need to ask some higher being for guidance. Which is why evolution evolved brains wired for belief. So that some people would believe in religious authority figures and do what they say and follow their guidance and behave morally.

[TheTruth101]

To ask a higher being of moral codes establishes a dependency as well as independency.

Precisely my point. People who understand and live by moral codes such as the Golden Rule because they have figured out themselves that it is in their and everybody's best interest don't need to ask a higher being for moral codes do they? Only those who don't have the mental capacity to figure this out for themselves need to ask some higher being for guidance. Which is why evolution evolved brains wired for belief. So that some people would believe in religious authority figures and do what they say and follow their guidance and behave morally.

I haven't gotten this in awhile, Joey used to do it all the time as well as morphine.

I quoted your one sentence that went with the flow of your whole argument. What you quoted goes totally against the idea of my last paragraph.

[Danmark]

You have to fear him to keep order. herirarchy is established in heavens as well as here on earth.

you have to fear him as you fear your boss at first day at work. You should strive to fear him because in th end, you will pass the test of eternity. In due meaning, consider it your bar exam.

What you are rather attempting is to get away from the Bar exam simply because you see no benefit right at the moment. You do study for your exam because the society is established and is visible for you to earn your survival if you pass the exam. However, you do not want to undergo suffering for God simply because to you, eternity is invisible therefore it dosent exist concluding to no benefits.

Danmark, is energy visible? or, is oxygen visible? or wind?

Its nature, and that is what God is all about, and he holds nature.

How do you think Fire exists in the first place? Its just Big Bang again and the nature created it? But wait, humans can make it, and wait, its made to keep us warm when its cold.

And wait, back in the days there were no heaters, but wait, back in the day there still was winter. So wait, without technology how can one be kept warm at night without the sun? Exactly, God gave us the elements for our surival from beggining of time.

This is your mythology, not mine. I don't have to fear myths.
This life is all there is, and that's enough for me. Yes there are invisible things we know about an can measure them.

As many have said, there is no need for these primitive ideas of god any more since we understand phenomena we once could not. There is no longer a reason to believe in the God of Fire, when we know what causes fire.