Who Decides About Right Or Wrong

[Michael]

Hello,

 

I guess this question has been asked quiet often although I could not find a thread.

 

Who decides about right or wrong, when there is no god? When I do not have any laws or commandments why should someone judge me for stealing, killing and so on? Is it about what feels right or wrong? Can´t be.

When people want to live together, they need rules and structures. Who should make the rules? Who should decide about the structures? Many of the laws in Germany (and I guess in America too) are build upon the Bible (killing is wrong, stealing is wrong...). Is there at last something good about the bible? Or are those laws "universal" laws (wherever they come from)?

 

Looking forward to your ideas

 

Michael

[Vigile]

Laws aren't built on the bible. If that were true homosexuality, eating shell fish, and mixing your threads would be illegal and slavery, poligamy, etc... would be legal.

 

Killing and stealing are generally considered wrong because as you said, society wouldn't work if they were the rule.

 

Morality is determined through cultural upbringing and to some extent through evolutionary instinct. Rouseau called it the General Will and christians as well as atheists are ruled by this. That is, unless they are sociopaths.

[ShackledNoMore]

The biggest difference, as I see it, is that without a god handing down decrees we have to THINK to come to conclusions about what is right and wrong.

 

How about a conceptually similar question that doesn't carry all the baggage to stand in the way of our analysis tha the first does? Whose to say what's beautiful? Notice there is not an absolute standard, but there is a high degree of general consensus (but not complete consensus), and that the consensus differes amoung cultures, but is usually fairly similar between cultures. Remind you of what is accepted as moral standards?

 

The thing you say about rules and structure: some need it more than others. We can see empiracally that we don't necessarily need the threat of an absolute dictator, legislator, judge, and executioner to keep everybody's behavior in line: 1 - 2% of the American prison population, for instance, are atheists, whereas they constitute maybe a 7 - 15% of the population.

 

Just like beauty, you don't need an absolute standard passed down by an ultimate authority to have a reasonable consensus. I don't need a god to tell me that killing or stealing is wrong: it is as firmly entrenched in my value system as for any xian.

 

Because I haven't unconditionally accepted what some community has told me that some god who is not to be questioned has decreed, I also think that our president's blood bath was immoral, even though many xians disagree and some may point to biblical precedent. Notice, by the way, how biblical morality has diverged from contemporary values. Who today, even among xians, feels that those who work on the sabbath should be stoned to death, or that we should keep slaves? Most think that such barbarism is abhorrent, as do I.

 

One will hope that hatred and bigotry against gays a few hundred years from now will seem as abhorrent as stoning those who work on Sunday and keeping and beating slaves does today. So far, xians, and particularly evangelicals who most relish their absolute standard still have their religious text to support what they are trying to perpetuate as a contemporary standard. If it's different in the future, it WILL be like the dropped contemporary standards such as the one that says slavery is acceptable. They will have to rationalize and someday come up with some excuse such as, "That was OT, it no longer applies under the new covenant." ...and that might happen in the future.

 

All this leads to an important point: the "absolute standard" put forth in the bible is not an absolute standard at all, there is room for it to change according to contemporary standards, and it is not handed down by a god, but it is a standard decreed by us humans. It is so well packaged and so piously enforced it just LOOKS like an external, absolute standard. It is not.

[Kelli]

That's easy, but I wondered the same thing for a while after my deconversion, so I understand your wondering about it.

 

judge me for stealing, killing and so on

 

Stealing and killing cause harm to someone. Basically, if it causes legitimate harm to someone, it should be considered to be "wrong." Why care about anything else? If what you're doing isn't hurting anyone, then no one should give a damn one way or the other.

 

What I love about the Wiccan rede in particular (& BTW, I am not Wiccan), it's easy to understand and it seems to include not only humans but non-human things as well, like animals and our environment.

 

Do what you will, so long as it harms none

 

See? Easy, easy! No long list of rules and regulations, but I still can't go out killing people or stealing their wallets or extorting money from them. I can't cheat my employer and must have good work ethic because not doing so causes harm to my employer, against the good-faith agreement I made with them when I came to work for them...

 

You get the picture. No god needed in order for there not to be chaos in the world. I like the Wiccan rede, but most non-Christian religions and philosophies basically teach the same thing.

[SWIM]

Hello,

 

I guess this question has been asked quiet often although I could not find a thread.

 

Who decides about right or wrong, when there is no god? When I do not have any laws or commandments why should someone judge me for stealing, killing and so on? Is it about what feels right or wrong? Can´t be.

When people want to live together, they need rules and structures. Who should make the rules? Who should decide about the structures? Many of the laws in Germany (and I guess in America too) are build upon the Bible (killing is wrong, stealing is wrong...). Is there at last something good about the bible? Or are those laws "universal" laws (wherever they come from)?

 

Looking forward to your ideas

 

Michael

 

 

Common sense, and a "sense" of empathy for others is where EVEN religions get their laws (well sort of) religion tends to go off the deep end, and goes even further to destroy harmony amoung people, in fact religion divides people.

 

Funny how religious people think that "people" in general will all be asshats without a religion. This is NOT true. I love my family, tolorate things others (xtians) would find intolerable.

 

An hell no, the laws of the US are NOT based on the bible.

 

I really am found of your "name" I know someone by that name, and I hope you do it honor.

 

peace.

[Vigile]

Michael, also note that the same christians who quote "spare the rod, spoil the child" also believe that moral law is universally inate.

 

Put another way, even xians know that if you just let a child grow up without trying to influence his or her morality that that child will grow up to be a problem for society.

[quicksand]

If we couldn't decide for ourself that Biblegod was good, then He would be directing us to believe so. This violates the Christian concept of freewill.

 

So yes, simply, we can decide what is right or wrong, good or bad, without god.

[hereticzero]

Hello,

 

I guess this question has been asked quiet often although I could not find a thread.

 

Who decides about right or wrong, when there is no god? When I do not have any laws or commandments why should someone judge me for stealing, killing and so on? Is it about what feels right or wrong? Can´t be.

When people want to live together, they need rules and structures. Who should make the rules? Who should decide about the structures? Many of the laws in Germany (and I guess in America too) are build upon the Bible (killing is wrong, stealing is wrong...). Is there at last something good about the bible? Or are those laws "universal" laws (wherever they come from)?

 

Looking forward to your ideas

 

Michael

That would be Chuck Norris.

[Vigile]

Never heard that one before Quick, but what a slam dunk.

[Grandpa Harley]

Hello,

 

I guess this question has been asked quiet often although I could not find a thread.

 

Who decides about right or wrong, when there is no god? When I do not have any laws or commandments why should someone judge me for stealing, killing and so on? Is it about what feels right or wrong? Can´t be.

When people want to live together, they need rules and structures. Who should make the rules? Who should decide about the structures? Many of the laws in Germany (and I guess in America too) are build upon the Bible (killing is wrong, stealing is wrong...). Is there at last something good about the bible? Or are those laws "universal" laws (wherever they come from)?

 

Looking forward to your ideas

 

Michael

That would be Chuck Norris.

 

I thought it was a big guy who hangs out at the far end of the bar, called Morry...

[Japedo]

 

Try to prove that people of the xtian faith are better humans then those with out faith or with different faith. Not the case at all. In Fact Christians are about the only group that dance with glee about the thought of people burning forever. I wont mention the sordid sex crimes, embezzlement, adultery, drugs, child abuse, spousal abuse, emotional abuse, self loathing and so forth that xtians are involved in. They will use the lame ass excuse that they aren't real Christians ™ What a pant load many are their leaders that engage in these things.

 

 

There were laws about Murder, theft and so forth before Moses brought down the tablets. Don't believe me? Read the buybull, according to that these laws existed.. Some clues..

 

Moses ran originally from Egypt because he murdered a guard, he didn't want to face the law of Egypt because murder was a crime. The story of Noah, Sodom and Gomorrah were all punishments given before there was supposed 'law'. However note, that Lot was still considered righteous even tho he got his own kids pregnant. (a huge sex crime) Ironic god kill two citys for supposid sex crimes yet lets the child rapist off the hook and even calls him righteous.

 

 

 

Overall the religious have less compassion and good will toward men if those men happen to be outside of their dogma/ group.

[Michael]

Thanks for your replies.

 

All your postings make sense to me, but I experience the morality of the masses as unstable. You can manipulate their values, so they think that killing is fine (depends on the victim) (most of them are religious or ethical idiots). As a german I know about the fact how easily people can get "new" values and "new" laws to act upon. At the end there is no bad concsiousnes (I know this word is wrong, but I do not have my dictionary).

The "Do what you will, so long as it harms none" seems to be a good rule . But as a rule for an society that loves "a simple life" or casting shows this seems to be not enough. Is my view of our western culture too negative?

 

What I really liked is the point, that christian values changed over the centuries. There is not THE law of the bible, that is stable and unchangeble. And an Evolution of Morality? I do not think so. As I said, the morality of masses can be such a weak thing. I guess something like the (I am not a nazi, although I am german) Holocaust could happen again, just because the values of many people are so unstable (Zimbardos stanford prison experiment). Is this a problem of the laws behind the morality or is this a problem of abusing and brainwashing people? Are the laws too weak, so we give them up so quick? And are laws and morality actually linked? Is there morality without laws?

 

So many questions. But it is good to get your point of view.

 

So far

Michael

[quicksand]

Never heard that one before Quick, but what a slam dunk.

Thanks Vigile. It's not my original argument and I don't remember where I heard that one first - but it definitely goes a long way in just a few short words in debunking the Christian assertion that God is the de facto origin of all goodness in the world and the basis of moral behavior.

[Ouroboros]

Who decides about right or wrong, when there is no god? When I do not have any laws or commandments why should someone judge me for stealing, killing and so on? Is it about what feels right or wrong? Can´t be.

The concept of not stealing, not killing etc is quite common in all cultures, regardless of religious or ideological backing. Even in non-god-based religions you would find these concepts. There are basic ideas that go through all societies just because they are based on the rules from the "game theory". The tit-for-tat rule, or rules of conduct and fair play will evolve in any society of animals where language develops. Animals that live in a group do not consider it socially correct to just go around and kill each other. And they don't even have any advanced language. Some of these concepts are genetically evolved into our beings, and some of them are taught through our parents, society and friends. The ideas have their own lives in a sense and are transfered from generation to generation through words and examples. What you're asking is in a sense where would the prescriptive morality come from (is-ought) if there's no authority that commands it, but I think we as a society, people, all together create a "supreme" body together. So by all of us being together as "the people", this "the people" is the authority to set these standards, and that's exactly what has happened. Americas law is based to a large part of stare decisis from court cases where the jury (representing the people) make their judgment. (Not all laws are like that, but quite a large part is).

 

If you are an intelligent and reasonable person, which I know you are, you understand the concept of both the silver rule and the golden rule, and even though you might not totally fully obey those rules, you know to a certain degree that if you would behave in a "bad" way, other people would follow and you would end up losing in the game rather than winning. The only right way to win by being "bad" is to be cunning and make sure you're only bad to a very small degree that it goes unnoticed and unchallenged. For instance, you might drive too fast on the freeway; you know it is wrong and against the traffic laws, but you don't see a cop and hope you won't get caught, and you do this because you're late for work. That's cunning and stretching your actions within the moral framework society has built up, and we all do this, but yet you know that if there's a lot of traffic you might avoid going really fast, because you know it could cause a crash and you would eventually lose instead of winning. These thought processes go on in your mind, even if you don't think of it, they are calculated deep down in your subconscious and guide you in a general moral direction. And this faculty of the brain has evolved through nature and the need of survival. So you have to some degree a moral compass, because you're the grand-grandchild of the surviving animals that first had that capacity.

[Sophronia]

The answer is that I decide. I am actually Queen of the Universe, and all of you answer to me.

 

Seriously... your question is at the root of the Human Condition. Great Men And Women have spent their lifetimes trying to figure it out. Ultimately I think each individual must balance personal feelings with some of the very valid teachings that are available to us. By this I don't necessarily mean religious scriptures. I mean my momma saying things like "Be thoughtful of others", "Close the door on your way out," and "Clean up your own mess".

[The-Captain]

Funny, this was one of the first things I asked about upon leaving the church. It seems that somewhere in all that sin nature talk we got the idea that people couldnt be moral without an old book telling us to be.

 

Im still not sure, but I would repeat what the others have said so far about empathy. It seems to be the surest basis of morality. And in regards to the moral corruption that can take place in a society. Well not much can be done about what others will think and believe. I think that all we can do is look to ourselves and make sure that what we do is right. Its not a perfect system by far, but ask yourself if the religous one was any better? Religion hasnt helped people reach much further than the baseline of morality for all its years. Perhaps morality/goodness/not being a bastard cant really come from any outside source like philosophy or religion.

 

Like any freedom, freedom to choose what is right can lead to trouble, but its better to have that freedom regardless. Choose what is right as best you can and judge the results. Get damm good at empathizing, its what keeps us human. Society starts with the individual after all.

[Kenny]

Great post! I'm enjoying what's being discussed and learning a bit along the way.

 

I can see where we (people, humanity, mankind, etc.) need SOME kind of rules. I don't know the origin of the quote, but it seemed to go something like "A person is smart, but people are stupid". I think, for the most part, that's an accurate statement even in the light of the fact that, in spite of ourselves, a smart person still does stupid things from time to time. But what's being discussed is whether or not there is something inside of each person that determines what's morally right or wrong. The conclusion that's reached when one realizes that what's good and proper in regards to the Bible doesn't necessarily line up with what's good and proper from a moral standpoint is obvious. They simply don't match up.

 

I was recently talking to a buddy who is currently a church leader in a huge church. He's aware that I no longer believe and for the most part, he understands my position. He's one who thinks that if the Bible turns out to be false and/or there is no God, he's lived a good life - kinda like Pascal's Wager in a sense. I can accept that train of thought, but one thing he said struck me as rather odd. He told me that without God and the Bible to rule over him and guide him, he's absolutely convinced that he'd be the worst of human beings... particularly sexually. I disagreed with him and told him that I thought he would, for the most part, be the same person but would be forced to find a real job. It occurred to me in the reading of this post that he isn't really to blame for thinking that. He's been told that since Day One. I think he would be lost for a very long time without those religiously imposed boundaries. He's been told he's a wicked sinner who has no hope of doing anything good since he was a child. After all, any good he could possibly come up with would be "as filthy rags" and any sinful thing could be erased with a prayer of repentance. It sounds great to think that anything we do that would hurt someone or violate a moral code can be made null and void by a simple prayer, but in believing that and exercising such belief, an individual is failing to take responsibility for their actions. Someone else is - and that's self-deception of epic proportions. But what is even more oppressive is the fact that, in that belief system, my friend is absolutely convinced that he isn't capable of good.

 

Christianity taught me that I was unworthy and unclean. I know now that I'm worthy of what I work to be worthy of. Period. My worth to others is determined by my actions. My self worth is determined by my actions. In regards to morality itself, I believe that in most situations, I could be a person who chooses the right thing to do in accordance with what I know. I'm also aware of the fact that I could choose in a selfish, thoughtless, or uncompassionate way. Ultimately, the decision would rest on the ability to be able to look at the guy who's staring at me when I shave every morning and I don't think for a second that any book or god has anything to do with that.

[Vigile]

What I really liked is the point, that christian values changed over the centuries. There is not THE law of the bible, that is stable and unchangeble. And an Evolution of Morality? I do not think so. As I said, the morality of masses can be such a weak thing. I guess something like the (I am not a nazi, although I am german) Holocaust could happen again, just because the values of many people are so unstable (Zimbardos stanford prison experiment). Is this a problem of the laws behind the morality or is this a problem of abusing and brainwashing people? Are the laws too weak, so we give them up so quick? And are laws and morality actually linked? Is there morality without laws?

 

Michael, you seem to be confusing mob mentality with a rational adoption of morality. Since you are German you would probably appreciate Kant's views on morality. He can be a bit tough to read, but he addresses these issues in detail.

 

Mobs can certainly support immoraility. I believe morality is both learned and something that can be reached using rational thought. Rationally, it would be hard to justify genocide even though crowds may come out in favor of it.

[Michael]

I remember reading a book of C.S. Lewis about this topic: "The abolition of man".

 

He claimed, that we need objective values, otherwise our entire world would break down. I guess I had this in mind, when I asked the question first. You are right, that I think, that this world would need some wise god in heaven taking care about it. But if he is in charge, why is this world such a mess? All the starving kids, terror, violence, death, pain. What about the xiang claim, that this world would be a paradise if we all would keep the laws of god? Would it be a better place? They say, that this world is a piece of shit, because we do not obey god. I mean he is in charge of all the beauty, created flowers and so on, but on the other hand (the really important stuff) is in control of satan? Weird idea.

 

And yes it is true, that it is always MY choice. The important thing about this is, that I know, that I have a choice. If I put this choice in the hands of someone else, even a god, I give away the emotional resposibility for my deeds. This could be an important point about it. People who know about their resposibility, they will treat other people right, people who give away this responsibility to someone else, will cause trouble.

[The-Captain]

What about the xiang claim, that this world would be a paradise if we all would keep the laws of god? Would it be a better place? They say, that this world is a piece of shit, because we do not obey god. I mean he is in charge of all the beauty, created flowers and so on, but on the other hand (the really important stuff) is in control of satan? Weird idea.

 

And yes it is true, that it is always MY choice. The important thing about this is, that I know, that I have a choice. If I put this choice in the hands of someone else, even a god, I give away the emotional resposibility for my deeds. This could be an important point about it. People who know about their resposibility, they will treat other people right, people who give away this responsibility to someone else, will cause trouble.

 

That is pretty damm wise Michael.

[Grandpa Harley]

I have a dislike for C.S. bloody 'I was at the last supper' Lewis that few would believe... he was LAME... beautiful dreams my entire lily white English arse.... The theme is repeated for reasons outlined in Campbell... it's Jung Space thinking...

[Grandpa Harley]

"A person is smart, but people are stupid"

 

I first saw it in Men in Black

 

"A person is smart. People are dumb, panicky dangerous animals and you know it. Everything they've ever "known" has been proven to be wrong. A thousand years ago everybody knew as a fact, that the earth was the center of the universe. Five hundred years ago, everybody knew that the Earth was flat, and fifteen minutes ago, you knew that humans were alone on it. Imagine what you'll know tomorrow."

[Michael]

Dear Vigile,

 

when I think about morality, I think there should be a morality you can apply in everyday life. It should be more than a theory. Because (here comes an important point) I do not trust myself enough. I can see what I would be capable of, I know about my own thoughts (no I am not Hannibal Lecter!) all this greed and anger inside. Right now it is in control, but what would happened if I and the entire humanity would loose control? I am thinking about the terrible things going on in Africa (Kenya), the stuff that happened in former Yugoslavia. So they very often lost control. Maybe it is just the xian thinking inside of me of being an evil animal, that needs to be guarded. That is one thing I have learned during my xian time, that everything good came from god and everything evil came from me. No good thing, that I could be proud of, just evil stuff I would have been ashamed of.

 

I wonder if this is a xing topic at all, because xians are killing and abusing and the OT ist a cruel and immoral book.

 

But you are definitly right, that I am confusing things. That is bacause my own picture is not complete yet, so I spit out little pieces, fragments.

 

Thanks.

[Grandpa Harley]

you're used to the idea of fallen man. It's nonsense. you never needed a god to prevent you from killing, raping, stealing... the claim that man needs a god to be good is bollocks. It cheapens mankind and the 50,000 years devlopment we've struggled through... Imange ofd god, I call bullshit... I'm BETTER than the god of the bible... I'm pretty accepting of all people. tell me I'm a worthless anything, then you have the devil to fight, since there is no quarter from that insult...

[ShackledNoMore]

...but one thing he said struck me as rather odd. He told me that without God and the Bible to rule over him and guide him, he's absolutely convinced that he'd be the worst of human beings... particularly sexually.

Because (here comes an important point) I do not trust myself enough. I can see what I would be capable of, I know about my own thoughts (no I am not Hannibal Lecter!) all this greed and anger inside.

Remember Nicky Cruz? He was a gang member (or leader?) and an all around nefarious dude. Then he was "born again" and became a hard core, evangelizing fundy zealot. Time after time in church I remember testimonies of what horrible sinners the congregationalists were before getting "saved." Then there's the reinforcement, the "fallen man" doctrine. This is just from my own observation, but it seems like a lot of xians I know either are/were pretty nasty characters or undeservedly deemed themselves as such (probably prompted by guilt). A few years after my deconversion I met up with a brother and sister that I had been fundy teenagers with at my church. They had fallen away, but not deconverted in the same sense as me or as is typical on this forum (I had already deconverted by then). They still believed the propaganda, they just didn't care. I met up with them for one day, we went to the beach and had dinner. They weren't really interested in anything much other than getting high. They stole some "sex wax" from a beach side stand and tossed it as litter shortly afterward. So I think the mindset of humankind being inherently evil, the fall from grace, absolute morality, especially defined by an external divine source, and the belief that humans are unable to control their baser instincts definitely exists, is promoted by xianity, and is alive and well in some circles, and totally defines some people and their sense of morality. They have a genuine need to have an external discipline imposed on them, such as religion or the military, to keep them in line. I think of it as the "Nicky Cruz" syndrome, especially for those who actually behave as thugs without their external framework (as opposed to those who just feel guilty). I do not know whether dogma feeds the Nicky Cruz syndrome or whether the Nicky Cruz syndrome feeds dogma. Most likely they feed each other. Unfortunately, relying on this external framework to keep one in check doesn't seem to work quite as well, repression tends to seek an outlet. For those who don't need it (i.e., the ones who feel guilty) it can just be an excuse for their failings as a xian (talking specifically about xianity, now). I think these are often the ones who note that they have become more compassionate and caring after they deconvert. For those who do need it (and I really am talking the Hannible Lecters, here, though the Hannible Lecter example is an exaggeration in many cases), well, I don't know, whatever their framework is, religion, military, boot camp, prison, etc. maybe it helps, but I don't think it always contains them, or contains them completely, or addresses their real issues.