Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[smigenboger]

Whether religions are true or not, it wouldn't make much of a difference.

God, real or not, may have influenced society as we know it more than any other thing or person

[Urist McOverlord]

Some psychologist or another (sorry, I forgot who. I'll link to the appropriate article as soon as I can) proposed that we go through several developmental stages of morality. As young children (and often for a good while longer) we avoid doing "bad" things because our parents or teachers punish us. Later on, we avoid them because it is against the law. We do not fear the retribution from legal authorities, we merely recognize that breaking the law is a bad thing. Finally, we enter true high-level concious moral thought. We evaluate morals from a legitimate right-or-wrong level.

Just throwing that out there.

[Muz]

Personally, I'd say you can't be moral without reason to fear not being moral, and add one could easily argue that those morals are defined by the fear in the first place. We aren't taught "Stealing is wrong", we're really taught "Stealing and getting caught leads to punishment, so don't steal 'cause then you'll never get caught"...

If you have to run your life by fear, then perhaps you do need religion, because there is clearly something wrong with you: I don't need negative riders imposed upon me by society to not do something like steal; there are plenty of negative riders all of their own, and regardless of that, what exactly does stealing gain me? Anything worth stealing is protected beyond the point where stealing it is a valid use of my time.

Perhaps i could not steal something because there isn't really any reason to steal something. You know?

Ah, that's because you're not in a position to steal right now. When you have a morally black and white situation, or even greyish white, you'll always pick white, religious or not. But what about a dark gray situation?

Let's say you become a banker. Someone hands you $42795 in cash and tells you to put that in his account. You can steal $50 and get away with it because he might not even know how much is in there. Would you steal it? A religious person wouldn't, because it is a sin. A lawful person might not, because of fear of getting caught.. but getting caught there is unlikely. A smart person might suspect that the cash is illegal, and believe that he's not hurting the world by stealing money from thieves.

Now take that same situation again, and assume that your monthly wage is $100. As it happens to be in a third world country.

But then you have "religious" countries like Indonesia where corruption is rampant. Often, they justify it by saying "everyone else does it, so I have to do it to live. God is most merciful and does not punish theft if it's necessary."

[RAM]

Let's say you become a banker. Someone hands you $42795 in cash and tells you to put that in his account. You can steal $50 and get away with it because he might not even know how much is in there. Would you steal it? A religious person wouldn't, because it is a sin. A lawful person might not, because of fear of getting caught.. but getting caught there is unlikely. A smart person might suspect that the cash is illegal, and believe that he's not hurting the world by stealing money from thieves.

Let's say you become a banker. Someone hands you $42795 in cash and tells you to put that in his account. You can steal $50 and get away with it because he might not even know how much is in there. Would you steal it? A religious person would, because they are righteous, and would use it for their god's purposes. A lawful person might not, because of social stigma. but being exposed there is unlikely. A smart person might suspect that the cash is illegal, and believe that they are not in a position to know with any certainty.

[Micro102]

Let's say you become a banker. Someone hands you $42795 in cash and tells you to put that in his account. You can steal $50 and get away with it because he might not even know how much is in there. Would you steal it? A religious person wouldn't, because it is a sin. A lawful person might not, because of fear of getting caught.. but getting caught there is unlikely. A smart person might suspect that the cash is illegal, and believe that he's not hurting the world by stealing money from thieves.

Yeah you shoved all morality into religion as if morals only come from religion.

[Osmosis Jones]

The idea that only fear of punishment is holding back athiests from committing crimes falls under the category of bollocks, methinks. Morality is seperate from religion. One can inform the other (and vice versa), but beyond that, religion can lay no claim to being either the cause or the owner of morality.

Not to mention that I know I can find bible verses extolling 'morals' that we all would find completely and utterly repugnant, and that even the most fanatical Westborough Baptists would be opposed to.

[Neruz]

Personally, I'd say you can't be moral without reason to fear not being moral, and add one could easily argue that those morals are defined by the fear in the first place. We aren't taught "Stealing is wrong", we're really taught "Stealing and getting caught leads to punishment, so don't steal 'cause then you'll never get caught"...

If you have to run your life by fear, then perhaps you do need religion, because there is clearly something wrong with you: I don't need negative riders imposed upon me by society to not do something like steal; there are plenty of negative riders all of their own, and regardless of that, what exactly does stealing gain me? Anything worth stealing is protected beyond the point where stealing it is a valid use of my time.

Perhaps i could not steal something because there isn't really any reason to steal something. You know?

Ah, that's because you're not in a position to steal right now. When you have a morally black and white situation, or even greyish white, you'll always pick white, religious or not. But what about a dark gray situation?

Let's say you become a banker. Someone hands you $42795 in cash and tells you to put that in his account. You can steal $50 and get away with it because he might not even know how much is in there. Would you steal it? A religious person wouldn't, because it is a sin. A lawful person might not, because of fear of getting caught.. but getting caught there is unlikely. A smart person might suspect that the cash is illegal, and believe that he's not hurting the world by stealing money from thieves.

Now take that same situation again, and assume that your monthly wage is $100. As it happens to be in a third world country.

But then you have "religious" countries like Indonesia where corruption is rampant. Often, they justify it by saying "everyone else does it, so I have to do it to live. God is most merciful and does not punish theft if it's necessary."

I wouldn't steal it because it's a fucking stupid idea.

[andrea]

#1 - Perform actions which maximise the benefit to all sentient organisms.
#2 - If an action/inaction would have no effect on the planet/universe as a whole, then act for the maximum benefit of the human species.
#3 - If an action/inaction would have no effect on the species, then act for the maximum benefit of the largest group of people.
#4 - If an action/inaction would have no effect on other people, then act for the maximum benefit of myself.

I follow a similar moral code. With a bit more emphasis on human kind maybe.


also, I wouldn't steal that money, unless maybe I had a family to feed which would starve unless I got that extra money. I wouldn't because it is their money, they are trusting me do keep it for them and stealing it would case suffering to that other person, suffering which doesn't seem justified in any way. He is just a person trusting an employee in a bank to do his job. Why does he deserve to be punished in such a way?
as I said, I may do it if I had a starving family to feed ( and I would still feel guilty) but even then I'll probably try to find other, better , ways before using theft.

[Muz]

I wouldn't steal it because it's a fucking stupid idea.

If it was that stupid, then the world would be completely crime-free.

Let's say you become a banker. Someone hands you $42795 in cash and tells you to put that in his account. You can steal $50 and get away with it because he might not even know how much is in there. Would you steal it? A religious person wouldn't, because it is a sin. A lawful person might not, because of fear of getting caught.. but getting caught there is unlikely. A smart person might suspect that the cash is illegal, and believe that he's not hurting the world by stealing money from thieves.

Yeah you shoved all morality into religion as if morals only come from religion.

Nobody ever shoved morality into religion. It's a hypothetical situation where worldly enforcement would be very poor. I never said a non-religious person wouldn't steal it out of morality. No, that was the question and people aren't answering with a "no, because it's wrong, and by doing so, I hurt society", which is the most moral approach to it. "No, because it's stupid" is another lower layer of morality. "No, because i'd be tortured in hell for 20 million years" is the lowest level of morality, but it still discourages crime by discouraging stupid people from performing acts of crime.

Unfortunately, this whole religion discouraging punishment thing doesn't work, because only 10% of "religious" people actually practice what they preach. They don't actually believe in hell or heaven or punishment, etc, but use it as a way to discourage others from performing crimes. They pick out verses that support their views and completely ignore the ones that don't. By showing a fanatical support for their religion and forcing others to "believe", they're able to use it as a tool to manipulate people.

I see religion being sort of like supporting a sports team. Very, very few will stay loyal if they're losing, but everyone becomes fanatical supporters if it's winning. You get fist bumps, choirs, special greetings, special group rituals, etc. Fans of rival teams will fight and even kill each other to support theirs.

Problem with religion, or even believing in non-religion is that before death, you don't know who'll win.

[Neruz]

I wouldn't steal it because it's a fucking stupid idea.

If it was that stupid, then the world would be completely crime-free.

No, if it was stupid and everyone was smart, then the world would be crime-free.

The world is full of idiots. Crime is perhaps the ultimate example of this (either that or short-sighted stupidity).

[TheDarkJay]

"'cause it's a stupid idea" means cons > pros, which means we know the possibility of negative consequences are there, we don't like (arguably the word fear could be used here) those negative consequences so avoid the action. People who don't fear/dislike those negative consequences enough, go on to guess what? Commit crime.

When I mean fear I don't mean huddled-in-corner-crying-and-wanting-mommy-to-make-the-evil-clown-go-away fear, I mean "Bad crap could happen and I would not like that bad crap to happen".

Morality, in my opinion, ultimately stems from a kind of social contract. "I don't want bad crap to happen to me at your hands, you don't want bad crap to happen to you at my hands, ergo how about neither of us give the other bad crap?"

[Neruz]

"'cause it's a stupid idea" means cons > pros, which means we know the possibility of negative consequences are there, we don't like (arguably the word fear could be used here) those negative consequences so avoid the action.

When I mean fear I don't mean huddled-in-corner-crying-and-wanting-mommy-to-make-the-evil-clown-go-away fear, I mean "Bad crap could happen and I would not like that bad crap to happen".

Most any sort of crime is the cause of short-term idiocy. Stealing X is good for me right now, but has no long term gain, and may well have a long term negative consequences as well.

There is no fear involved in that decision, merely logic. Fear is a simplistic and primitive emotion and has no place in modern civilization.

[Muz]

I wouldn't steal it because it's a fucking stupid idea.

If it was that stupid, then the world would be completely crime-free.

No, if it was stupid and everyone was smart, then the world would be crime-free.

The world is full of idiots. Crime is perhaps the ultimate example of this (either that or short-sighted stupidity).

 

Ok, fine, you win... this time.

[TheDarkJay]

There is no fear involved in that decision, merely logic. Fear is a simplistic and primitive emotion and has no place in modern civilization.

Fear is what defines the advantages and disadvantages of those long-term goals though. The logic is there to help us avoid the disadvantages, because we fear them.

[Neruz]

There is no fear involved in that decision, merely logic. Fear is a simplistic and primitive emotion and has no place in modern civilization.

Fear is what defines the advantages and disadvantages of those long-term goals though. The logic is there to help us avoid the disadvantages, because we fear them.

Nope. Fear is a distressing emotion aroused by impending danger, evil, pain, and soforth. There is no fear in the logical assessment that a given action is not a good choice. In fact there's no emotion anywhere in logic at all; that is kind of the point.