Go to Religion in the Modern World
- Add a comment
- Go to Where do your morals come from?
I got my morals in Kindergarten ~
They've yet to show me a better plan.
posted by
Jenasis
on February 15, 2007 at 8:01 AM
| link to this | reply
Dylan23 - in a broad sense I agree with the point that you are making
There is no disputing the enormous influence that religous beliefs and its founding doctrines have had in the formation of our society's laws and subsequently our morals. But it really is a chicken or the egg type of contention to suggest that all of society's or an individual's morals are derived at one point from religious doctrine. When one begins to speak of the influences of our ancestors on modern day morality as a means of contending religious doctrine is the root of all morality, we are inevitably led to historical immoral practices endorsed by religious belief. Social injustices that were for the most part changed over time from without and not from within religion itself.
posted by
gomedome
on February 15, 2007 at 6:52 AM
| link to this | reply
Very good post.
The question of where morals come from is a difficult one. You said heart, mind and conscience. But where did you get the content that was put in your heart, mind and conscience? Your parents and community? And where did they get theirs?
The problem is that with any morals you can keep asking this question: And where did that come from? At some point, I think, we must assume a first premise, be it God (divine command), natural law or whatever. An assumption, though, is not firmly grounded; else it would not need to be assumed (it would be self-evident or able to be proved).
Maybe the principle of noncontradiction is a good place to start. Any justifiable morals will have to be based on coherent premises. Next to find if the premises themselves are sound.
posted by
Dyl_Pickle
on February 15, 2007 at 3:21 AM
| link to this | reply
David1Spirit - its math for stupid people is it not?
Or at the very least a smokescreen hiding the obvious truth. With a 95% versus 5% division, I think it is a fair question to ask the 95% why they have been so lame? Pushed around to the point where a meagre 5% of the populace is responsible for the decay of an entire society's morals? What were the remaining 95% doing during this period? ......sitting on their hands?
Yet people buy this stuff, simply because it blames others than themselves.
posted by
gomedome
on February 14, 2007 at 6:12 PM
| link to this | reply
Very good post and very good points
You had mentioned in an earlier post about how "non-believers" and people of like minds make up a very small percentage of the population, so it has to be the other 95% or so that can't seem to get it right. Yet it keeps going on and on.
Of course you know the saying about how insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results. Over 2000 years of insanity and the results haven't changed yet.
posted by
David1Spirit
on February 14, 2007 at 3:07 PM
| link to this | reply
Tonyzonit -you make some very valid points in your well articulated comment
I must agree that a lot of what we refer to as "moral decay" has existed in one form or another ever since man has walked erect. There are some examples from our era however that are unique to our era. The exponential growth of the number of children being born outside of a nurturing family unit taking place in conjunction with the sexual revolution would be one example. There is no historical precedent for this modern day social development. Illicit drug use and its distribution is another example. All of your points are valid however, as far back as we can remember there have been glaring examples of moral decay. Pleas of "let's get back to the good old days" conveniently forget some of these realities.
posted by
gomedome
on February 14, 2007 at 12:49 PM
| link to this | reply
strat - the abdication of personal responsibility was always my beef with
these people.
The devil didn't make them do it, their own lack of willpower and intelligence made them do it. The selective reasoning needed to pick and choose the verses that work while ignoring anything that does not work is also something I have hard time with. What type of life guiding precepts allow a person to apply only what suits them?
posted by
gomedome
on February 14, 2007 at 12:25 PM
| link to this | reply
Gomedome - I agree with your frustration and your sentiments.
On the point about the perceived moral decay, I bet, though, that all generations claim the same thing. It is probably just the inevitable result of ageing and wistfully looking back at the past. If it is nostalgia about the age of our our own youth and the times then, I don't personally see the seventies as a golden moral era. The Cold War, Vietnam, Khmer Rouge, etc - just as much selfishness in society then as now - it was still OK to hit your kids - people had less knowledge about the danger of smoking and the cigarette companies didn't care. Going back further, people had to get married and stay married, so they stayed miserable, hit each other and went to prostitiutes. Racism enshrined in the States, South Africa and elsewhere. It goes on and on. I think, by your own terms of a non-religious viewpoint, people like yourself and your readers are proof of a gradual maturing of society. Hence the ever-increasing need to safeguard these gains by standing up against the regressive and divisive forces of religious dogma and mutual exclusivity.
posted by
Antonionioni
on February 14, 2007 at 11:15 AM
| link to this | reply
Herein lies the question no one seems to be able to answer:
"Society's morals have decayed in a general sense over the last few decades but during that entire period, including right up until today, the majority of people in our society have been Christians or believed in a Christian God. Why did you bible thumpers screw things up so badly?"
At least, no one can seem to answer that one to my satisfaction, anyway.
I can remember working in a restaurant, years ago, when I was a kid, and one of the kitchen managers was this cretinous, verse spouting ignoramus who, as luck would have it, was also a lousy cook. I remember one day, he pointed to a lovely NY Strip on the broiler and said, "See that, Strat? That's a perfect steak. God told me just when I should turn it."
Which prompted another unanswserable question from me: "So, why didn't he tell you when to turn those other three you burned to a crisp fifteen minutes ago?"
Ultimately, it becomes a lesson in the absolute abdication of personal responisibility.
posted by
strat
on February 14, 2007 at 9:04 AM
| link to this | reply