It has been claimed that atheists by definition are amoral. If we do not believe in the spiritual basis of the universe and we do believe that all that is is from materialist causes, we cannot have true morals. That without the belief in the eternal consequences of our lives, we have no motivation to be moral.
On the other hand, it can be claimed that traditional theism also is not a basis for true morality. If you have to be threatened with eternal consequences, if you are only good because someday you will be called to account to an all knowing God, then you are being good not because it is the right thing to do, but to please the all powerful benefactor. The bargain is stated as between gaining the whole world and losing your soul.
Question for debate: Are atheists necessarily amoral? Are traditional theists' appearance of morality, merely self serving practicality?
I originally thought to put this into Right and Wrong, because it deals with morality. But then I thought it would be better in Philosophy because it deals with the philosophical basis for morality. But finally, I moved it to Christianity and Apologetics because each side of this argument is aimed at disproving the validity of the other.
The basis of morality.
Moderator: Moderators
-
McCulloch
- Site Supporter
- Posts: 24063
- Joined: Mon May 02, 2005 9:10 pm
- Location: Toronto, ON, CA
- Been thanked: 3 times
The basis of morality.
Post #1Examine everything carefully; hold fast to that which is good.
First Epistle to the Church of the Thessalonians
The truth will make you free.
Gospel of John
First Epistle to the Church of the Thessalonians
The truth will make you free.
Gospel of John
Post #41
I think morality is like a scale.
On one side is the (sometimes selfish) desires of the individual and on the other is the "greater good" of the group.
The nature of the group is not important. Religions, Political parties, Cultural groups, Families, Badminton clubs, bar crowds or prisons - all can have this dynamic applied.
Likewise, the nature of the "morals" (or rules) are not important - only that the group agrees to them. The fact that some rules might seem pre-determined (or even divine) is just because they are the most logical.
Each persons scale tips one way or the other. Those who are amoral put thier own desires before the needs of others.
On one side is the (sometimes selfish) desires of the individual and on the other is the "greater good" of the group.
The nature of the group is not important. Religions, Political parties, Cultural groups, Families, Badminton clubs, bar crowds or prisons - all can have this dynamic applied.
Likewise, the nature of the "morals" (or rules) are not important - only that the group agrees to them. The fact that some rules might seem pre-determined (or even divine) is just because they are the most logical.
Each persons scale tips one way or the other. Those who are amoral put thier own desires before the needs of others.
