Can A Code of Morality/Ethics Exist without God?

[keysersoze]

Those who believe in God blindly accept a moral and ethical code that was invented by men who lived centuries ago. Those men based that code on the cultural mores of their time - there was nothing universal about it at all. In truth they made it up themselves and then pretended that god had done it in order to pursuade others to do as they thought best.

I think the point is that its a basis that relies upon the argument that God is in start point for that morality to exist. Its a separate question whether you know/believe that it was "invented by men." It still does not defeat the argument itself that that specific moral code basis God as its source. The reason being that belief in God is part faith - faith in that those "invented by men" were either Prophets/Messenger/etc. relaying his Moral code.

As a consequence most traditional religions include a number of undesirable characteristics inherited from the ancient cultures that invented them - such as sexism, homophobia, xenophobia, elitism and so on.

In Western Civilization, pre-Judeo-Christian religions accepted and embraced homosexuality (i.e. Greek/Roman religions did not see much wrong with it). Current Western religions no longer embrace that view.

 

[keysersoze]

A lot of morality is fairly basic common sense. It seems clear to me that a society full of truth telling, polite, helpful people will thrive more then a society full of thieves, liars and murderers. I have a strong desire to see humanity in general, and some specific humans, prosper and so it makes sense to act in a way in which will help this happen.

Some morality also comes from instincts. There is a strong case to show that we have evolved many of our morals - the instinct to want to help those genetically close to us will help spread genes similar to our own, the instinct to respect elders can help the tribe to prosper, the instinct to avoid incest will avoid some genetic problems, the instinct not to kill fellow members of your tribe will avoid weakening the tribe and so on.

I agree that much of morality is common sense - hence that's why much of the world is can live together and not be clearly repulsed by each other.

Things like lying/stealing are seen as 'morally wrong' in all moral codes and ethicists and those are just the start of moral code - its really the difficult moral questions that define a moral system.

For instance, you mentioned the instinct to avoid incest will avoid some genetic problems.

In time where birth control exits, the problem of genetic problems from child birth no longer arises. Hence, does that mean that a modern solution to that problem should no longer deem incest to be 'morally wrong'? I'm sure there are other reasons , be it legal/psychological but are there moral reasons to avoid it then, if the fear/concern of instinct has been overcome?

This may explain the existence of moral ideas common through out many different societies. They are common not because of some kind of universal cosmic moral certainty, but because we all share common genes.

There are also genetic variations as well, and in time those with genetic variation that allows for the most successful reproduction will lead to survival (survival is not of the fittest but those who can consistently reproduce the most). Similarly, in time a moral view can come to dominate and be passed on by those dominant. To me, that makes the premise of common genes as a basis for morality somewhat flawed... we've seen entire society's hold perverse notions morality (i.e. Much of Nazi Germany's assent to the inferiority of Non-"Aryans").

To me the important thing is to be continuously re-evaluating one's moral stance, and to continue to work towards self improvement. To take a concrete view on something, by saying that an action and all its related and derived actions are always right/wrong can lead a person to bad things while thinking they are good.

That's what relative morality means to me - not so much that there is always a way to argue things are good or bad, but that we must never be satisfied that we have a static and final code of morality. It's the biggest flaw I find in the theocratic moral model, that it discourages analysis into the morality of some actions by declaring them forever bad or good.

While you may view a static code of morality to be danger, I find it offers benefit in the sense that it may not stray overtime or radically to adopt a moral viewpoint that is disturbing (i.e. Stalinist USSR or Nazi Germany - both societies essentially reinvented their moral codes along with their legal codes).

 

[Gazoo]

Sorry I got in the game a little later here and no I didn't every post ...but my answer is 'NO' you cannot have 'absolute' ethics without a surpreme being (Call if what you will). You can have your own morales or ethics. E.G., You can make it OK to bury children live and say that's good. Our universal mind and majority would say it's wrong.

Most would go to the bible or attack the bible and/or the Christian Church, however, the initial question didn't bring that into play, so I won't. Even though the first thing people do in these kind of thread debates is go straight there. The ultimate being can only set absolute rules.

Just my opinion.

 

[GAMETHEORY]

I think this can be answered quite simply:

Can A Code of Morality/Ethics Exist without God?



1. There is no god.

2. Therefore morality and ethics cannot be derived from god since god does not exist.

3. Morality and ethics are concepts that exist within human cultures.

4. Ergo it would appear to be humans and human cultures that design concepts of morality and ethics.

The only difference between theists and atheists are that atheists accept that they must take responsibility for defining their own moral/ethical standards by way of reason. Theists abbrogate this responsibility by pretending that god defined their moral system for them. In reality they are simply adopting the moral systems designed by other people several centuries earlier without questioning them or their appropriateness.

 

[1984]

-addressing a few points...

Omar has a different moral code than i do. he is also a sociopath. he also goes to church and believes in the Easter Bunny (aka Jeebus). funny how that works.

"a moral code" is completely arbitrary, as pointed out earlier. there is no universal moral code, or god's moral code, or a "right" moral code. it changes over time, and even in one time, it is different from culture to culture, region to region. it is put into your brain by your surroundings and influences as you mature. by parents, family, community, that one weird kid on the block that burns frogs alive, etc.

none of that requires magic powers or some creator. speaking of which, a creator that could create such an amazing universe would have to be infinitely more complex than that universe, so who then created him in his complexity? does he also have a sky daddy? : )

as for "disproving god" that is an ignorant challenge. take a 9th grade science class for your brain. there is not one piece of scientific evidence of this creator, not one. that is your "proof" and it stands to logical reasoning. the burden is on the believer. you make the claim, show the proof. one little piece of proof. scientific proof, testable proof. not your aunt's ratty bible with heavenly passages highlighted and contradictions and evil ignored. that is not proof : )

don't be afraid of no afterlife. no heaven. no pearly gates or seeing grandma again. life is good now. enjoy it. make the most of it. in 100 years, no one will remember you. my ego can deal with that.

 

[Yahweh]

Re: Can An Egg Exist Without A Chicken?

the lord is an idiot!!! ..............



only on bgol

The all-powerful, singularly perfected Lord of all creation makes one purposeful typo and you decry Him as an idiot...

Only humanity...

 

[Dert Bagg]

Seriously... is that cornchips and rotten-egg farts? WTF!?

 

[keysersoze]

I think this can be answered quite simply:

Can A Code of Morality/Ethics Exist without God?



1. There is no god.

2. Therefore morality and ethics cannot be derived from god since god does not exist.

3. Morality and ethics are concepts that exist within human cultures.

4. Ergo it would appear to be humans and human cultures that design concepts of morality and ethics.

The only difference between theists and atheists are that atheists accept that they must take responsibility for defining their own moral/ethical standards by way of reason. Theists abbrogate this responsibility by pretending that god defined their moral system for them. In reality they are simply adopting the moral systems designed by other people several centuries earlier without questioning them or their appropriateness.

Boro,

Your not addressing the points I raised in my previous responses to you. Instead, your addressing the issue of God.

Now granted that you firmly hold it a fact that there is no God, that does not eliminate the fact that others believe in God on the basis of FAITH alone.

Now, please address my previous questions on moral development overtime - are your moral-ethical views constant or are you open to the view that they are changing overtime.

If you hold them to be constant - what is the basis for that? If you find them to be flexible and open to change, are they really moral views or rather just socio-cultural norms of that society at that point in history. Think about it: the most obvious morals (i.e. abhor murder/theft/lying) which are embedded into almost any society's norms but on more complex moral questions that emerge (i.e. same sex relationships) the societies moral norms vary.

Where you stand in all of this? Explain/account for this.

 

[J Storm]

Dont ANIMALS attack other ANIMALS who attack their loved ones?

 

[keysersoze]

-addressing a few points...

Omar has a different moral code than i do. he is also a sociopath. he also goes to church and believes in the Easter Bunny (aka Jeebus). funny how that works.

"a moral code" is completely arbitrary, as pointed out earlier. there is no universal moral code, or god's moral code, or a "right" moral code. it changes over time, and even in one time, it is different from culture to culture, region to region. it is put into your brain by your surroundings and influences as you mature. by parents, family, community, that one weird kid on the block that burns frogs alive, etc.

none of that requires magic powers or some creator. speaking of which, a creator that could create such an amazing universe would have to be infinitely more complex than that universe, so who then created him in his complexity? does he also have a sky daddy? : )

Granted if you accept something like that premise, does that then mean that you can no longer say to another person "that's wrong" or "your wrong" since its all relative to where you come from (upbringing/socialization).


Does Morality even exist then? Since by definition morality is:

principles concerning the distinction between right and wrong or good and bad behaviour.

Your definition takes the principles out since it says its all relative.

 

[keysersoze]

Dont ANIMALS attack other ANIMALS who attack their loved ones?

How does that have to do with morality?

Oxford definition of morality:

principles concerning the distinction between right and wrong or good and bad behaviour.

But back to your animals point, don't insects attack other insects who attack their loved ones? --> Ants/Bees protecting the Queen or hive?

 

[J Storm]

How does that have to do with morality?

Oxford definition of morality:


But back to your animals point, don't insects attack other insects who attack their loved ones? --> Ants/Bees protecting the Queen or hive?

We have Moral Codes in place to protect ourselves and those we love. It all originates with instinct and emotion.

You don't need a bible or god or koran to let you know something aint right if somebody does wrong to you or someone you love. Your instincts will tell you it aint right. Humans and Beast all have that instinct.

Hell, Even PLANTS have that instinct.

The "Codes" or "LAWS" are put in place to make sure there is "JUSTICE" for that "CRIME" or "SIN"

 

[capcomq]

Can A Code of Morality/Ethics Exist without God?


NO.

 

[J Storm]

The Code of Hammurabi

http://www.wsu.edu/~dee/MESO/CODE.HTM

 

[Chitownheadbusa]

Can A Code of Morality/Ethics Exist without God?

of course they can.
i believe "the rules of conduct" that were put in the Bible and other so called Good Books were put there by humans.
those words didnt come from some supreme being.
i believe they came from peolpe like me and you..

the people that tell you that those codes cant exist without God...are the God believers...lol

im an Athiest/free thinker/humanist/ whateva else you choose to call me......Do i have a code of ethics...well, i say yes.
but others may say No.

it depends on what that persons definiton of ethics and morals is.
where did i get my morals.....i honestly feel i got it from the humans i was surrounded by.
...that, along with my natural human instincts, is what I FEEL made me the rounded young man i am today.


did the words in the Bible and other books said to be words of God's have a influence on me deciding whats right and wrong....imma say yes.

even though i dont believe a lot of the stuff in the Bible...Karon..etc. when they speak on Gods and other God like stuff.
i still find that some of the information in the Bible can be useful in survivng in this fucked up word we live in.

its possible to agree and disagree with something at the same time.
i have a open mind...i willing to get information from all different type of sources....then make my PERSONAL conclusions at the end.

 

[thesenator20904]

One answer.. NO!!!

 

[The Lawnmower Man]

No choice made on the basis of either a perceived reward or punishment can truly be considered moral. To compel morality is to destroy it so therefore morality can only exist in the absence of God.

The truth is that many Christians realize deep down that many people, including themselves, are not moral and are in great fear of this fact. They consequently see God a their only means of protection from this among many other harsh facts of life.

In the end, however, only atheists can be moral, if they so choose; theists can at best only claim to affect morality in practice.

Morality is about the choices you make when no one is watching, not even God.

 

[AtomAnt]

Morality is about the choices you make when no one is watching, not even God.

sir...