Are the moral views of atheists more beneficial to society than those of religious people? (America, morals)
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I don't. I think it amusing that it seems to exclusively embody such wonderful superior attributes . . . like honesty, morality, reason, rationality, intelligence, compassion, etc. etc. . . . It always amuses me that those who separate themselves from others (on whatever basis) attribute such beautiful traits to themselves and those like them . . . while assigning the negative ones to those inferiors they are separated from. Amusing.
I'm not seeing anybody say that believers of any type can not be good, reasonable, or intelligent. Sure they can be, and many are!
But as far as beneficial to society goes secular ideals have a leg up. Why? Because when society is predominantly secular there are no religious boundaries. No sinner versus saved. For example, a large amount of money gets donated for the construction of a building. Religious organizations may rally that the building be a church. That church may meet the spiritual needs of its members, but only the people in that specific denomination of that specific religion. Secular organizations may rally for the building to be a hospital. That hospital will treat the medical needs of far more people because there will be no qualifiers (i.e. you need not be of a specific denomination of a specific religion) to seek treatment there. Obviously the secular idea (hospital) would benefit more people than the religious idea (church).
All that rambling boils down to this: There are good people on both sides of the fence. But in the end, religious people are going to default back to their dogmatic texts - some of which give excuses for things such as slavery, treating women as second class citizens, and even murder - no matter how good intentioned they are. And those who don't agree with the religious texts are essentially thrown under the bus. Atheists/Agnostics/Nonbelievers don't have that general problem. We don't have religious leaders and sacred texts to refer to when decisions are to be made, so a little deductive reasoning suggests that we'd be more apt to make decisions to benefit society as a whole.
Spotted1: Excellent post. The main difference at present between Muslims and Christians is that mor Muslims are accentuating the barbaric passages in their 'holy book', while Christians aren't (as much). But one doesn't have to look hard to find historical examples of Christians perpetrating terrible acts and killing millions, often in ways as painful as their minds could devise.
MysticPhD: Your sarcasm, which you applied with a trowel, is easily seen as much more egocentric than the atheistic world-view which you deride.
Why would people have their own sets of morals if they believed that other people's set of morals were better?
Why does there have to be a better? Better presumes some preferred absolute standard for comparison. I thought atheists and agnostics were above such trifles as absolute values.
Why does there have to be a better? Better presumes some preferred absolute standard for comparison.
Hell yeah. I believe that a morality doesn't involve killing/torturing people for fun is better than one that does. If I thought that elements of somebody else's morality was better than mine, then I would immediately(whether conscously or not) incorpoorate those elements to my views.
I think the moral views of atheists are more beneficial becaise they emphasize ethical behavior for its own sake, without hope of reward or fear of punishment. There are no supernatural carrots and sticks to dilute the worthiness of acting with consideration for others and behaving well.
I think you are talking Ethics.
Morals, as you suggest, run on emotions like fear and love.
Ethics and Virtue are more dispassionate, and derive from reason.
I submit that morals and ethics are almost inseparable. I agree that ethics derive more from reason in general, as there are college courses in them (but not in morals). Virtue, I would say if pressed, is more equally derived. But there is a small distinction between ethics and morals in practice. Morals have a more religious tinge to them.
MysticPhD: Perhaps I owe you an apology. However, the 'conceits' of the religious, being founded on mythology and 'righteousness', are more laughable IMO. That certainly isn't to say that there are no atheists who give the rest of us a black eye!
I thought I was quite diplomatic . . . since I consider both sides culpable and equally amusing in their conceits.
I think christians are primarily interested in glorifying their god and have much less concern for society in this life, except to "save souls" for an afterlife. Atheists live in this world, for only this life, therefore this life is where they place their attention.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
