God? Don't be silly!

[old.Tohtori]

No, they're claiming religion has no effect on their morals. Your view is that as religion used to be the moral framework for pretty much everyone, some of their morals come from religion. No-one has claimed religion has never had any bearing on moral thought, just that it has no bearing on their personal morality. The two things aren't incompatible.

But they are compatible as all morals we hold on modern day stem partly from religion.

As such, morals taught, even without religion, stem partly from religion. It's just a fact.

To recap, Toh left this thread for a couple of days so he could come back in a make the same statements and try and confuse us into thinking he was right again.

You're making the same old points without any evidence other than it's your opinion, I couldn't be any less religious yet I have an understanding of what is right and wrong. I wasn't taught right or wrong because a religion said I had to be, I was told the difference because of the society we live in.

I await more sweeping statements, while being very defensive and irate when presented with facts.

I left the thread because i was getting personal, i didn't leave to access my opinions.

Read above for your anwser too, you're as much affected by religion then any other(not including hardcore teachings).

The morals of right and wrong stem from religion(not alone!) and as such, you're being taught the very same right and wrong as a religious kid.

 

[old.Tohtori]

So you're not saying that religion is the basis for our modern human values and that without religion we would still have the same/similar moral values?

If so then maybe you could further expand on what exactly you meant when you said:

I'm not saying that.

I'm sayig religion has effected how our morals are and as such, our morals have roots in afterlife being the "reason" too.

Without religion we would have mhmhmhm, which can't be proven. With religion, we have what we have.

But hey, you guys make my posts to mean what-ever you need to make them to mean so you can have a smile and a cup of joe *pats heads* Whose my little atheist zealots.

Yes, that last part was meant as a pure "F*ck you too".

 

[Krazeh]

I'm not saying that.

I'm sayig religion has effected how our morals are and as such, our morals have roots in afterlife being the "reason" too.

Without religion we would have mhmhmhm, which can't be proven. With religion, we have what we have.

But hey, you guys make my posts to mean what-ever you need to make them to mean so you can have a smile and a cup of joe *pats heads*

So you're saying that without religion we wouldn't have the values that we have today?

If that is the case I fail to see how you can be saying anything other than that religion is the basis of our modern moral values.

And i'm not trying to make your posts mean anything. I simply trying to understand what it is exactly you are trying to say because it appears to change everytime you respond.

 

[old.Tohtori]

So you're saying that without religion we wouldn't have the values that we have today?

Exactly, 'cause that's how it is because that's how it happened.

It's not a "it's not necessarily so", but it's a fact how it is.

If that is the case I fail to see how you can be saying anything other than that religion is the basis of our modern moral values.

Partly. It's effected morals. Etc.

 

[Krazeh]

Exactly, 'cause that's how it is because that's how it happened.

It's not a "it's not necessarily so", but it's a fact how it is.

Partly. It's effected morals. Etc.

Just to make 100% clear, you believe there is a correlation between modern human moral values and religion and that the cause of modern values, whether in part or otherwise, is religion?

 

[Ch3tan]

No it has not Toht, morality would exist fine without religion. All religion has done is force one person or groups values and morals on whichever country / empire/ society they rule at the time.

Do you really believe that we would be unable to tall right from wrong without the heaven/hell stick being used on us?

I admit I am having trouble keeping track of your current thinking, you seem to have changed your view quite a few times in the last couple of pages (see krazehs quotes of your posts if you do not agree). So either you have dismissed your initial argument as incorrect, or you are moving the goal posts. Which is it?

 

[old.Tohtori]

Just to make 100% clear, you believe there is a correlation between modern human moral values and religion and that the cause of modern values, whether in part or otherwise, is religion?

Yes, western civilizations moral values and definitions of "good and bad" have been effected by religion.

Waiting with anticipation what you're loading for there.

I admit I am having trouble keeping track of your current thinking, you seem to have changed your view quite a few times in the last couple of pages (see krazehs quotes of your posts if you do not agree). So either you have dismissed your initial argument as incorrect, or you are moving the goal posts. Which is it?

Hasn't changed anywhere.

 

[Krazeh]

Yes, western civilizations moral values and definitions of "good and bad" have been effected by religion.

Waiting with anticipation what you're loading for there.

Not loading anything, although I am curious if you've heard of the phrase "correlation does not imply causation". So far i've not seen any evidence that what I, or many other people, determine as right or wrong has been influenced or effected by religion. The fact we have both morals and religion does not imply the cause of morals is religion, no matter how much you might believe that to be the case.

Morals and ethics are a by-product of being a social animal. We require them in order to operate as a society. It's part of who we are as a species, and doesn't require any input from god/religion or any other higher power.

As Ch3t has said above, the only real impact religion has had on morals is to attempt to force one person or group's values and morals onto others.

Out of curiousity, where do you think the morals and values codifyed by religion came from in the first place?

 

[old.Tohtori]

Not loading anything, although I am curious if you've heard of the phrase "correlation does not imply causation". So far i've not seen any evidence that what I, or many other people, determine as right or wrong has been influenced or effected by religion. The fact we have both morals and religion does not imply the cause of morals is religion, no matter how much you might believe that to be the case.

Well all you really need to do is go back in time a bit and see how rules and regulations, that now have become the "norm" or "standard", were implemented by the church.

Ofcourse not all of them were sane, or even remotely possible these days, but the ones that stood through time are there.

One just can't say "morals have nothing to do with religion" full stop, as we would have to speculate on a society completely void of religious contact and how their rules and regulations are, to find which rules and regulations(moral included) are infact "natural". There's just no proof, and as such, i was hoping that size of a fact would be accepted and not picked apart like that.

Morals and ethics are a by-product of being a social animal. We require them in order to operate as a society. It's part of who we are as a species, and doesn't require any input from god/religion or any other higher power.

As Ch3t has said above, the only real impact religion has had on morals is to attempt to force one person or group's values and morals onto others.

Out of curiousity, where do you think the morals and values codifyed by religion came from in the first place?

You'd have to argue that religion wasn't needed for us to become the social beings we are now for that to hold truth. As i said, it's not the case.

Religion was part of our growing process to what we are, without it, who knows.

It doesn't matter whatimpact religion had, because it's speculation(not fact) how we would have evolved without religion. All we can say as dact is that we did evolve with religion and religion did influence our right/wrong.

I think our current moral thingies came from all that was part of our past. Simple as that, it's what we've become.

I can accept that atheism will effect our future, most likely will and in a 100 years or so we could have a discussion about how it did/didn't.

It doesn't undermine my beliefs or way of life, it doesn't make our moral code any different.

 

[Ch3tan]

Really toht? Please tell us which rules and morals were introduced by the church. And then also tell us why they wouldn't have come about without the church.

 

[old.Tohtori]

Really toht? Please tell us which rules and morals were introduced by the church. And then also tell us why they wouldn't have come about without the church.

I'm not going to start studying the rules and regulations of pre-church era and then compare what doctrines and rules the church placed on us, or how many fo those rules and regulations were mixed yada yada...

You know as well as i do that the fact is, religion is part of our history and religion has, for beter or for worse, made an impact(could say big impact even) on how we are now.

And you say i "like" to argue...

 

[Krazeh]

I'm not going to start studying the rules and regulations of pre-church era and then compare what doctrines and rules the church placed on us, or how many fo those rules and regulations were mixed yada yada...

So you're going to make a sweeping statement and then when questioned on it refuse to actually provide anything to back it up? Doesn't sound like a particularly solid argument imo.

You'd have to argue that religion wasn't needed for us to become the social beings we are now for that to hold truth. As i said, it's not the case.

Religion was part of our growing process to what we are, without it, who knows.

It doesn't matter whatimpact religion had, because it's speculation(not fact) how we would have evolved without religion. All we can say as dact is that we did evolve with religion and religion did influence our right/wrong.

Again you've fallen into the correlation implies causation trap. The fact we have both moral values and religion does not mean there is any correlation between the two. You simply can't claim as a fact that having religion means that religion influenced what is right and wrong.

As you may have guessed I don't have any religious belief and neither do my parents, nonetheless I know the difference between right and wrong. This has not come about from religion but from the fact that as a social animal I have certain innate skills that allow me to put myself in the place of others and understand how my actions would effect them and make them feel, which then allows me to make a value judgement on whether my actions are "good/bad".

For example, I've never been the victim of robbery but I can easily imagine how being robbed would make me feel. As such I know that being robbed would not be a pleasant experience and can therefore conclude that stealing is bad. This has not required any input from God or religion and the same thought process would very likely lead to the same conclusion in a world with no concept of religion.

 

[Ch3tan]

Well you made the statement, so back it up or it is worthless. You cannot just make throw away statements and then back them up with "it's right because I say it is, and I cannot be bothered."

Going to stop following this now, you lack the ability to discuss anything, and just go on the defensive. Good luck nath, krazeh and gaffer if you are continuing with this. I fear for your sanity.

 

[old.Tohtori]

I can't believe you guys are actually arguing that religion didn't effect how we became and how we are...

Ch3tan, it doesn't require backing up.

We are as we are partly due to religion. It's a damn fact, ask anyone.

No one is claimign we WOULDN'T have become what we are, but you're actually disbuting religion havcing any effect on us.

Ch3tan this time you're barking way up at a seriously wrong tree.

What you're asking is like asking me to prove that "nazis had an effect on history". It's a given fact, end of.

 

[Wij]

The history of how religion has affected moral thinking does not imply that ethics is based on religion. History <> Meta-Ethics.

You're confusing your subject matters and conflating one with the other.

You are also shifting between a strong and weak version of your argument as it suits and trying to imply that proof of the weak version:

w.) Religion has affected the course of moral thinking in human history.

somehow affects the stronger version.

s.) Ethics is based on religion.

The two are entirely seperate positions and proof of the one does not give proof for the other.

(w.) is entirely uncontentious here and everyone will agree to it but it does not affect the truth of (s.) at all. (s.) is a meta-ethical statement and is not subject to a historical analysis.

 

[old.Tohtori]

All i'm saying is that current morals and values have been effected by religion as religion has effected where we are now.

I'm going to seriously end discussing if people claim that's not true 'cause you're living in some denial paranoia state.

 

[Krazeh]

I can't believe you guys are actually arguing that religion didn't effect how we became and how we are...

That would be because we don't agree that how we are is due to religion. It's called having an opinion and frankly given the previous points made in this thread I'm amazed that you believed people would just accept that religion has made us who we are without question.

Ch3tan, it doesn't require backing up.

We are as we are partly due to religion. It's a damn fact, ask anyone.

You'd imagine if it were as ubiquitous a fact as you claim then more of us on here would have heard of it. As it is it appears several people disagree with you which kinda throws your "ask anyone" defence of it's factual status out of the water.

And anything you put forward in an argument/debate needs backing up regardless of how concrete a fact you believe it may be.

 

[old.Tohtori]

Ok...ok. Fine.

Religion hasn't in ANY WAY effected the way humans and/or our civilization is now.

Is that a fact?

Religion is just a "mirage" that never actually happened?

Crusades were just a bed story?

Are you SERIOUSLY claiming that religion had no effect at all to how we ARE now?

I'm not asking if we would be the same without it, or if we'd be better without it, or if we'd evolved into squid like creatures without it...i'm asking...has religion had ANY effect?

 

[nath]

But hey, you guys make my posts to mean what-ever you need to make them to mean so you can have a smile and a cup of joe *pats heads* Whose my little atheist zealots.

Yes, that last part was meant as a pure "F*ck you too".

Please do not bring that bullshit here. The only reason this thread has lasted as long as it has is because of a surprising lack of pointless argumentative crap such as this. The reason people are, as you see it, making your posts mean whatever we need them to mean is because you are not clear enough with what you're trying to say. Don't lash out because you feel we misinterpret them.

Now, your point that religion has affected our morality - well, religion is a fairly significant part of our history and clearly has had an effect on society. However, you seem to have warped your point from saying that some things *stem* from religion to what now appears to be that it's simply had an effect. The question whether we'd have a similar morality without religion is an entirely valid one, and the fact that people with no spiritual beliefs can have strong moral values is quite relevant.

Not necessarily? Doing things to make people think more of you don't necessarily mean they are done to make people think more of you? Come on. I didn't say "all things people do are to make people think more of you".

You asked why people would do

things that make people think more of you even if you never have to interact with those people again?

and my response was that from an atheist perspective, one would do think that make people think more of you not TO make people think more of you, but because of a moral code. The by-product being that they think highly of you. IF someone were to do something SOLELY to make others think more of them when there was no chance of seeing them ever again then yes, I would say that's a pointless endeavour. The point I'm trying to make is that the fact that people think highly of you when you do morally sound actions does not mean the reason for doing morally sound actions is to make them think more of you. Nor is it to get in to heaven, or experience a reward.

 

[old.Tohtori]

1 lease do not bring that bullshit here. The only reason this thread has lasted as long as it has is because of a surprising lack of pointless argumentative crap such as this. The reason people are, as you see it, making your posts mean whatever we need them to mean is because you are not clear enough with what you're trying to say. Don't lash out because you feel we misinterpret them.

2 : Now, your point that religion has affected our morality - well, religion is a fairly significant part of our history and clearly has had an effect on society. However, you seem to have warped your point from saying that some things *stem* from religion to what now appears to be that it's simply had an effect. The question whether we'd have a similar morality without religion is an entirely valid one, and the fact that people with no spiritual beliefs can have strong moral values is quite relevant.

3: You asked why people would do

and my response was that from an atheist perspective, one would do think that make people think more of you not TO make people think more of you, but because of a moral code. The by-product being that they think highly of you. IF someone were to do something SOLELY to make others think more of them when there was no chance of seeing them ever again then yes, I would say that's a pointless endeavour. The point I'm trying to make is that the fact that people think highly of you when you do morally sound actions does not mean the reason for doing morally sound actions is to make them think more of you. Nor is it to get in to heaven, or experience a reward.

1: Simple fact; there's nothing to misinterpret. People still argue even if i put it as clearly as i can. I bring the bullsh*t because you bring your own. So step off that highhorse.

2: "some things stem from religion" and "had an effect" is the same f*cking thing. Without religion, morals wouldn't be as they are now. Simple. They COULD be, but we'd need a different planet to prove that.

3: So you're saying that i'm right, but not all cases are like that. It's what i damn well said. I never said, NEVER SAID, that "people ONLY do things so people think more of them". That's the kind of insinuated "claiming" is what is bullcrock.

And i'll say it again, you look at your own posts and how you act and maybe you'll find what you've been doing isn't as perfect as you think in this discussion. Hell, ask a neautral party to do so.

 

[Krazeh]

Ok...ok. Fine.

Religion hasn't in ANY WAY effected the way humans and/or our civilization is now.

Is that a fact?

Religion is just a "mirage" that never actually happened?

Crusades were just a bed story?

Are you SERIOUSLY claiming that religion had no effect at all to how we ARE now?

I'm not asking if we would be the same without it, or if we'd be better without it, or if we'd evolved into squid like creatures without it...i'm asking...has religion had ANY effect?

As Nath has pointed out religion is a fairly significant part of human history and of course it's had an impact on human society over the ages.

And of course given the still sizeable proportion of people that believe in God/religion it has an impact on certain sectors of society.

But I disagree that religion makes all of us who we are today. Who I am and how I act has got nothing to do with religion.

Without religion, morals wouldn't be as they are now. Simple.

You have absolutely no evidence to back that up, beyond the flawed belief that a correlation between there being moral values and there being religion implies a causal link between the two.

There are plenty of people around the world who have moral values that have come about without any resort to God or religion and yet are very similar to the moral values of people who have been told what is right and wrong by religion.

 

[DaGaffer]

Ok...ok. Fine.

Religion hasn't in ANY WAY effected the way humans and/or our civilization is now.

Is that a fact?

Religion is just a "mirage" that never actually happened?

Crusades were just a bed story?

Are you SERIOUSLY claiming that religion had no effect at all to how we ARE now?

I'm not asking if we would be the same without it, or if we'd be better without it, or if we'd evolved into squid like creatures without it...i'm asking...has religion had ANY effect?

That's not the same statement. You were claiming our basic morality was defined via religion (in part). People are disagreeing because they can show that moral frameworks are quite capable of existing without religion.

However, I do understand what you're trying to suggest. Religion, the threat of eternal damnation etc. have indeed had an impact on our morality. You can't separate us from our history and all the baggage that comes with it. We in the west think the way we do, have rules and laws that we do because our history has been shaped by Judeo-Christian thinking.

But that doesn't mean the source of our morality is religion. The source of our morality is other human beings. No deity came down from on high with commandments. Religion is simply a means of expressing a set of values, its not the source of those values in itself.

 

[old.Tohtori]

As Nath has pointed out religion is a fairly significant part of human history and of course it's had an impact on human society over the ages.

And of course given the still sizeable proportion of people that believe in God/religion it has an impact on certain sectors of society.

But I disagree that religion makes all of us who we are today. Who I am and how I act has got nothing to do with religion.

You have absolutely no evidence to back that up, beyond the flawed belief that a correlation between there being moral values and there being religion implies a causal link between the two.

There are plenty of people around the world who have moral values that have come about without any resort to God or religion and yet are very similar to the moral values of people who have been told what is right and wrong by religion.

Ofcourse i don't have facts because that's not what i'm claiming.

I'm claiming, that moral teachings taught to you have a religious background as you yourself said "had an impact on society".

That's what religion was a few hundred back, rules and regulations, morals, values etc. Those are what effected us and what we believe now.

I'm not claiming "your morals are religious", i'm saying "the moral teachings we hold as "default" have been effected by religion".

1: That's not the same statement. You were claiming our basic morality was defined via religion (in part). People are disagreeing because they can show that moral frameworks are quite capable of existing without religion.

2: However, I do understand what you're trying to suggest. Religion, the threat of eternal damnation etc. have indeed had an impact on our morality. You can't separate us from our history and all the baggage that comes with it. We in the west think the way we do, have rules and laws that we do because our history has been shaped by Judeo-Christian thinking.

3: But that doesn't mean the source of our morality is religion. The source of our morality is other human beings. No deity came down from on high with commandments. Religion is simply a means of expressing a set of values, its not the source of those values in itself.

1: Yes, moral frameworks COULD have spawned witout religion but they DIDN'T. That's the whole point. It's just a fact that it is what it is and religion did effect it. That's what i don't get why people are arguing a known fact.

2: Thank you.

3: Ofcourse it's not the ultimate source, nor am i saying that god told us to be what we are now.

People really need to stop the paranoia that i'm claiming you to be religious people, with every statement made, or that i'm trying to trap you so i can point a finger and go "Aha! Jesus!".

 

[Calaen]

What about the tribes that live in the rain forests that have not had the pleasure of seeing a bible. They have morals which I doubt have come from any religious background and are more based on how their own society works.

Your first post regarding morals was telling us morals/religion go hand in hand. Yet people throughout the ages have all died because of religion, morals have had no part to play on some of the actions carried out by people in the name of religion.

 

[old.Tohtori]

What about the tribes that live in the rain forests that have not had the pleasure of seeing a bible. They have morals which I doubt have come from any religious background and are more based on how their own society works.

Your first post regarding morals was telling us morals/religion go hand in hand. Yet people throughout the ages have all died because of religion, morals have had no part to play on some of the actions carried out by people in the name of religion.

Go see how those tribes live, tell us and we can discuss.

See if you disagree with some of their rituals or think "that's not nice".

Hell, how about some fine cannibals while were at it?

Morals and religion go hand in hadn as religion has shaped our morals to what they are now.

It doesn't mean i'm claiming you believe in jesus, just because the society 200 years ago was formed with jesus prancing around.

It's like claiming that the hobo who took a dump on your lawn, which you stepped in, didn't have any correlation to your stinky foot now because the poo might have come from somewhere else. It didn't, the poo is from religion(you'll love that i know).

 

[Krazeh]

I'm claiming, that moral teachings taught to you have a religious background as you yourself said "had an impact on society".

And i'm claiming that the moral teachings taught to me, and the moral values that I hold now, have nothing to do with religion or a religious background.

1: Yes, moral frameworks COULD have spawned witout religion but they DIDN'T. That's the whole point. It's just a fact that it is what it is and religion did effect it. That's what i don't get why people are arguing a known fact.

But plenty of moral frameworks have spawned without religion. There are many people currently on the planet who have moral codes and values that have spawned without any input from religion.

 

[nath]

1: Simple fact; there's nothing to misinterpret. People still argue even if i put it as clearly as i can. I bring the bullsh*t because you bring your own. So step off that highhorse.

2: "some things stem from religion" and "had an effect" is the same f*cking thing. Without religion, morals wouldn't be as they are now. Simple. They COULD be, but we'd need a different planet to prove that.

3: So you're saying that i'm right, but not all cases are like that. It's what i damn well said. I never said, NEVER SAID, that "people ONLY do things so people think more of them". That's the kind of insinuated "claiming" is what is bullcrock.

And i'll say it again, you look at your own posts and how you act and maybe you'll find what you've been doing isn't as perfect as you think in this discussion. Hell, ask a neautral party to do so.

1. No, you're wrong. Your posts are all over the place and it's very difficult to pin you down to a specific post - I've not brought any bullshit at all and as I said, I'll ask you not to get aggressive or obnoxious or this thread will just die/get locked.

2. Something stemming from religion and religion having an affect is NOT the same thing. To suggest something stems from something else implies it is the ORIGIN of that thing. To imply it has an effect means it merely, well, had an effect on it. Without religion, morals wouldn't be as they are now. Simple. They COULD be, but we'd need a different planet to prove that. Can't you see the blatant contradiction here? In the first sentence you say absolutely morals wouldn't be as they are without religion, in the next you say they could be but we can't prove it.

3. I agree that the scenario you've manufactured is pointless. If you're never going to see someone again, there would be no point in doing something solely in order to make them think highly of you. I'm not sure what you're driving at here though.

If you have a problem with any specific post of mine, highlight it and explain why. You seem to rely on vagueness to win an argument - be specific.

 

[DaGaffer]

3: Ofcourse it's not the ultimate source, nor am i saying that god told us to be what we are now.

So what ARE you saying? I've completely lost the thread of this now.

 

[Calaen]

Game Over man he's got you!!!!

 

[old.Tohtori]

1. No, you're wrong. Your posts are all over the place and it's very difficult to pin you down to a specific post - I've not brought any bullshit at all and as I said, I'll ask you not to get aggressive or obnoxious or this thread will just die/get locked.

2. Something stemming from religion and religion having an affect is NOT the same thing. To suggest something stems from something else implies it is the ORIGIN of that thing. To imply it has an effect means it merely, well, had an effect on it. Without religion, morals wouldn't be as they are now. Simple. They COULD be, but we'd need a different planet to prove that. Can't you see the blatant contradiction here? In the first sentence you say absolutely morals wouldn't be as they are without religion, in the next you say they could be but we can't prove it.

3. I agree that the scenario you've manufactured is pointless. If you're never going to see someone again, there would be no point in doing something solely in order to make them think highly of you. I'm not sure what you're driving at here though.

If you have a problem with any specific post of mine, highlight it and explain why. You seem to rely on vagueness to win an argument - be specific.

1: My post may be all over the place because i'm discussing with THREE individuals who are talking their OWN views BUT taking things from other replies to other people as well. How about you try it. Your bull may be subtle, but it's still bull.

2: There's no contradiction; the morals that we have now, have become what they are as they have become. It's how it is. It's how we evolved etc. This does not remove the fact that it COULD happen other way. But as they are NOW, it's a FACT that it happened with religious influence. Get it now?

3: I'm not driving at anything, you're the one who started to question it and now agree to it. You questioned it because you didn't read it as it was written.

Lastly, no, i won't. I've pointed it out many times so you just have to read back if you want to better yourself, look from a neutral perspective.