Is morality dependent on religion?

[sanabas]

I dont think it does. Unless of course you envision some far distant future in which apes and/or dolphins worship us as the "ancient ones".

Why not? If they have similar instinctual behaviour to what protohumans had before religion, and exhibit similar ability to show feelings and emotion as protohumans did, what prevents them from being able to develop religion as well? If protohumans managed to rise above their instincts and become more-than-animals, what's to stop other animals rising above theirs?

Excellent question! And one I dont have a ready answer for to be honest.

I'd like to hear an answer on it if you come up with one after more thought. Both alternatives seem very implausible to me. I can't see language developing purely from instinct, I can't see it appearing until there is already the ability for thought and decision making. And I can't see how religion could appear unless there was already some sort of language in place to communicate the religious ideas. But your timeline of instinct->religion->ability to make moral decisions requires that one of those two alternatives be true.

Since I wasnt around 6000 years ago I have no idea whether the idea is valid or not. After I saw Star Trek and saw how the transporter worked, I realized that anything was truly possible.

Well yeah, if you have the freedom to insert technobabble into the script at will, anything is possible.

Not so much there. Both use the raw numbers of the group as a survival technique.

I was grouping schools of fish and herd animals together, and saying they are different to social animals. Hence the 'or' instead of an 'and'.

While by no means an expert, my opinion is that such social behavior is there to establish hierarchy and dominance.

OK. So the alpha male simply does what he wants, but why do the non-alphas contribute to the welfare of the group? If all those non-alphas are simply out for themselves, what happens to the heirarchy and the group?

To clarify I would say the "golden rule" to be in direct conflict with instinctual survivor behavior, i.e. survival of the fittest.

Which would mean that any animal that lives as part of a group, that exhibits behaviour that isn't simply looking out for number one, is acting contrary to instinct?

Survival of the fittest is not a really good way to describe how things work, as it gives plenty of scope for misunderstanding. Survival of the fittest doesn't mean every animal is acting as an individual, and therefore the most fit strategy is to be completely selfish.

Bottom line Sanabas, I dont have all the answers, I am just having an honest discussion and seeing where it goes. I have what I believe to be the case, and present what evidence I see as indicative. Do I think I am entirely correct? Honestly no...at least not anymore than anyone else here. At the root of this discussion, we are all simply guessing at things which happened so many millienia ago as to be forever shrouded in mystery. Most likely we will never know the answer.

Sure, I don't expect us to be working out the exact order everything happened. But just because you see religious influence as impossible to escape today doesn't mean that those without religion were incapable of making moral choices. There are animals today that show behaviour we'd see as moral. I can see how morality is possible without having a religious framework. I can't see how a religion can start among those who lack the ability to make moral choices.

Please define amoral for me and I will see what I can do. What does "amoral" mean to you?

Amoral meaning without morals. I'm sure you can come up with immoral religions, as in religions that have moral codes that are wrong according to your morality. But those religions still have a morality. I want an example of an amoral religion, a religion that has no moral code.

 

[MobBoss]

OK. So the alpha male simply does what he wants, but why do the non-alphas contribute to the welfare of the group? If all those non-alphas are simply out for themselves, what happens to the heirarchy and the group?

Well, from what I have seen, the vast majority of non-alpha contribution seems to be waiting until the alpha male is distracted and then rushing in for a mating opportunity on the females. Sounds rather selfish to me.

Amoral meaning without morals. I'm sure you can come up with immoral religions, as in religions that have moral codes that are wrong according to your morality. But those religions still have a morality. I want an example of an amoral religion, a religion that has no moral code.

Church of Satan maybe? Saw a show on it just last night and I would say that they certainly would fit that bill.

 

[ainwood]

Moderator Action: MobBoss, VoodooAce - debate the points, rather than making stupid attacks on each other. Warned.
Please read the forum rules: http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=422889

 

[IglooDame]

One of the reasons this is such an intractable issue is that some people believe that atheism is also a religion, and it tends to be theistic people (whose morality draws heavily from their religion) that think so.

So you end up with fish claiming you need water to breathe, and marine mammals claiming that while you swim around in it, you don't need to breathe it. Both are correct.

 

[warpus]

I have this feeling of "wanting to do good" inside of me. I like making people happy and would feel bad if somebody came to harm as a result of my actions.

Mobboss and CivGeneral, where do these feelings come from? I'm not religious, as you know.

 

[MobBoss]

I have this feeling of "wanting to do good" inside of me. I like making people happy and would feel bad if somebody came to harm as a result of my actions.

Mobboss and CivGeneral, where do these feelings come from? I'm not religious, as you know.

But you were raised religious as you have stated. Me? I would say its just a continuation of your upbringing and your surroundings.

 

[warpus]

But you were raised religious as you have stated. Me? I would say its just a continuation of your upbringing and your surroundings.

Some of my morals do stem from my Catholic upbringing, you're right, but a lot don't.

If morality was dependent on religion, wouldn't all my morals have to stem from my Catholic upbringing?

 

[MobBoss]

Some of my morals do stem from my Catholic upbringing, you're right, but a lot don't.

If morality was dependent on religion, wouldn't all my morals have to stem from my Catholic upbringing?

I would say that what you think is moral and what I think is moral is likely to be two entirely different things. However, the ones you expressed previously would certainly stem from a catholic upbringing.

 

[CurtSibling]

I have never been raised in any religion. My parents were secular.

But I grew to be a strongly moral person who believes in total justice.

Also, I don't drink, smoke or do narcotics...
And I have a zero-tolerance view on all these...

This is more than can be said for many so-called religious types.

How did this come about?

PS
God plays no part in my life...See my sigline.

.

 

[C~G]

Also, I don't drink, smoke or do narcotics...
And I have a zero-tolerance view on all these...

I have never understood what these things has to do with morals.
Now that you mentioned them could you or someone tell why some people these things as immoral?
All I see that they are self-destructive methods and I have myself found much better ways to reach the same goal.
Some young people even see them as "cool" just because some other folks see them "immoral".

PS
God plays no part in my life...See my sigline.

I think we all have noticed that Curt.
But not to spoil your fun, God does play a role in your life.
You seem to be all the time denoting his presence.
Even though for you God might be only imaginative creature born in the heads of the believers.
I think you are obsessed with God or at least the idea of God.

 

[CurtSibling]

I have never understood what these things has to do with morals.
Now that you mentioned them could you or someone tell why some people these things as immoral?
All I see that they are self-destructive methods and I have myself found much better ways to reach the same goal.
Some young people even see them as "cool" just because some other folks see them "immoral".

Being a moral beacon requires a clean body and mind.
Addiction to chemicals and alcohol is no basis for a proper life.

Ask yourself this:
How can you show an example of upright morals to others,
if you allow booze or drugs to flip you into a derelict loser?

I think we all have noticed that Curt.
But not to spoil your fun, God does play a role in your life.
You seem to be all the time denoting his presence.
Even though for you God might be only imaginative creature born in the heads of the believers.

Evoking the name of a fantasy does not denote my belief in said fantasy.

I only use the language my adversaries will recognise. If you can think of
a better way to describe their deity concept - I am open to suggestions!

I think you are obsessed with God or at least the idea of God.

To me, fantasy concept of 'God' is not a being, but a mass-grouping of delusions.

The only thing I am obsessed with is Zhang Ziyi.

.

 

[warpus]

I would say that what you think is moral and what I think is moral is likely to be two entirely different things.

Right, since morality isn't absolute.

However, the ones you expressed previously would certainly stem from a catholic upbringing.

So you concede that morality can stem from other sources - but believe that only morals derived from Christianity are "true" morals?

 

[Veritass]

THERE IS NO SUCH THING AS GOD™

You are at the least very presumptuous to state that you might know that "There is no such thing as God." At the very least you might want to qualify it as "I believe there is no such thing as God." It is quite possible that God exists outside of your knowledge or experience.

Now, if what you are saying is actually, "There is no such thing as God," then I will completely agree with you. Since God transcends the space-time universe that we exist in, calling God a thing would indeed be incorrect.

 

[WillJ]

No, morality is not dependent on religion.

If morality is dependent on religion, that means that one cannot be moral without being religious. I am moral. I am nonreligious. QED. I honestly don't see what's so complicated about this.

Maybe this already been said before (too lazy to read), but here I go anyway.

To MobBoss and others who claim that even atheists' morals ultimately stem from religious ideas, okay, but so what?

Sure, perhaps all my morals (not killing, stealing, etc.) were founded by religious people (I'm not sure about that, but I'll accept it for this discussion). ...All that means is that I borrowed my morality from religion. It doesn't mean I'm religious!

It's comparable to arguing that since I like religious Renaissance artwork (and some of my own artwork is influenced by it), I must be religious. A love for Renaissance artwork is dependent on religion. No.

I have morals. That, MobBoss, I'm assuming you'll agree with. Now, in addition to that, I consider myself nonreligious. Do you disagree with that? Do you think I'm religious---I'm nice and moral, so by definition I'm religious? If so, what's your definition of religion?

 

[CurtSibling]

You are at the least very presumptuous to state that you might know that "There is no such thing as God." At the very least you might want to qualify it as "I believe there is no such thing as God." It is quite possible that God exists outside of your knowledge or experience.

Don't you know that attacking a man's sigline is very bad form?

Anyway, the presence of the ironic 'TM' is obviously lost on you.
But irony is always lost on our trans-Atlantic cousins, in any case!

It is even more presumptuous to slaughter and convert people for a deity that
has not a shred of evidence or visible signs of existing. Perhaps you should
aim your righteous indignation at this fact before slaying a humble atheist.

Now, if what you are saying is actually, "There is no such thing as God," then I will completely agree with you. Since God transcends the space-time universe that we exist in, calling God a thing would indeed be incorrect.

Now, if you could prove the idols of christian, islamic (or any) myth are
real, then we could have a real debate about this...For now, I hold that
there is no god for us to see or speak to. So come back when you have
conclusive proof to put this cheeky heathen in his place.

Tatty bye!

 

[Sims2789]

I don't need fear of an all-powerful, omnipotent being that can condemn me to unhappiness, pain, and torture for eternity to tell me that I shall not kill, steal, or coveth my neighbor's wife.

 

[Eran of Arcadia]

I don't need fear of an all-powerful, omnipotent being that can condemn me to unhappiness, pain, and torture for eternity to tell me that I shall not kill, steal, or coveth my neighbor's wife.

Nor do I. I don't think that pointing out that most religious people aren't motivated solely by fear will be enough to convince some non-believers that religious people aren't motivated solely by fear, however.

 

[Birdjaguar]

Just because they exhibit the behavior does not mean that it is a result of the animals actually caring for one another as humans can.

But in most mammals, it does show genuine caring. Those animals may not be able to show what they feel as vividly as humans, but the affection is real.

The human need for a moral order and the human need for a philosphical framework are both carried in our genes. How we create those in our lives are culturally determined. Humans are community based and communities require some kind of structure or they break down. The moral and spiritual frameworks of aboriginals is very different than that of Sumerians, but they both provide the people with a way to organize their lives together.

Familes (mothers and babies) predate all religion. Mothers (of any variety)caring for their children and protecting them from harm is a moral act, correct? It is hard wired into the genes. When families with a need for long term child care first banded together to create a community, they created the need for explicitly "stated" moral behavior and an agreed upon view of how the world is organized (religion).

 

[CurtSibling]

But are morals similar to rights, a human invention?

.

 

[C~G]

Being a moral beacon requires a clean body and mind.
Addiction to chemicals and alcohol is no basis for a proper life.

Ask yourself this:
How can you show an example of upright morals to others,
if you allow booze or drugs to flip you into a derelict loser?

I know that very well.

I just don't compare such things to "morals" but rather the will to be able to live without booze and drugs. I see them as ways to escape reality, make up excuses even though some people say they just want to have fun. If person doesn't know to have fun without them which mean he/she is quite boring I'm sure booze and drugs won't change the issue unless it's in the eyes other fellow users.

So for me it's about the will.
And for me if you lack the will control and restrain yourself now and then, you're nothing but sorry loser.
Such concepts doesn't need religion but maybe some people need to support from other people, from community in order to live by their will.

If you can think of a better way to describe their deity concept - I am open to suggestions!

When it comes to your sigline, how about something like in the lines of "Don't believe the false advertising about God™"

I like the "God™" concept, reminds me that it is like psychological "TotalGym™" for some people.

No offence meant towards believers.
We probably have all our own sources were we draw that will, that energy to live on the way in order not to get kicked into the gutter.