Religion trademarks human morality

Atheistextremist
atheist
Atheistextremist's picture
Posts: 5134
Joined: 2009-09-17
User is offlineOffline
Religion trademarks human morality

  This post from Jumbo countering my topic of debate as above:  Quote:Taken from our side of Quote:

Taken from our side of the fence it's obvious that moral humans invented religion. Religions didn't invent morality - they trademarked it.

I appreciate your passion, but a degree of delicacy and diligence is required - one which I fear that the Internet cannot convey with any certainty.

"Morality" was invented by humans as well, just like God (apparently *Smiley*). The term "Moral Humans" beggs the question, for it is morality in mild contention here.

I do not for one second think that there is even an "our side of the fence", as if someone can be an arbiter on the way people feel. There is no "us and them", only dialogue - and a lot of it.

As I have mentioned in other threads, no one wins a moral debate in my experience. Almost all of my training has been in this field. If it were solved, it would be a moot point. Relgating it to irrelevance diminishes one's understanding, without adressing the question.

 

EDIT: It takes me a while, but I think I understand what you mean:

Quote:
My response was simply what's with the mention of blame at all. Sickness happens - no one is to blame. There's no meaning, no punishment and nothing to be gained by sheeting anything to blame or punishment or a god-plan at all.

If you put that into context with what I have said, then you answer your own question. Spelling it out a bit more:

If a certain disease were curable, and humans were able to cure it but did not, would there be someone to blame? Now if said cure were prohibitively expensive, does it not raise a sense of indignation within, given the amount of expenditure on efforts to kill off other humans? Since we are talking about our sense of humanity, is it not a sensible question to ask exactly what humanity is?

When you seriously look at it, is there no-one on this planet that is responsible for the aforementioned, blatant contradiction?

Keep in mind, these are questions, not statements. Ask yourself if an African gets the same treatment as an actor, then ask if that constitutes justice in the eyes of humanity or not. I really don't know.

"Experiments are the only means of knowledge at our disposal. The rest is poetry, imagination." Max Planck


Atheistextremist
atheist
Atheistextremist's picture
Posts: 5134
Joined: 2009-09-17
User is offlineOffline
Morality is not an invention

Atheistextremist wrote:

  This post from Jumbo countering my topic of debate as above:  Quote:Taken from our side of Quote:
Taken from our side of the fence it's obvious that moral humans invented religion. Religions didn't invent morality - they trademarked it.

I appreciate your passion, but a degree of delicacy and diligence is required - one which I fear that the Internet cannot convey with any certainty.

"Morality" was invented by humans as well, just like God (apparently *Smiley*). The term "Moral Humans" beggs the question, for it is morality in mild contention here.

I do not for one second think that there is even an "our side of the fence", as if someone can be an arbiter on the way people feel. There is no "us and them", only dialogue - and a lot of it.

As I have mentioned in other threads, no one wins a moral debate in my experience. Almost all of my training has been in this field. If it were solved, it would be a moot point. Relgating it to irrelevance diminishes one's understanding, without adressing the question.

 

EDIT: It takes me a while, but I think I understand what you mean:

Quote:
My response was simply what's with the mention of blame at all. Sickness happens - no one is to blame. There's no meaning, no punishment and nothing to be gained by sheeting anything to blame or punishment or a god-plan at all.

If you put that into context with what I have said, then you answer your own question. Spelling it out a bit more:

If a certain disease were curable, and humans were able to cure it but did not, would there be someone to blame? Now if said cure were prohibitively expensive, does it not raise a sense of indignation within, given the amount of expenditure on efforts to kill off other humans? Since we are talking about our sense of humanity, is it not a sensible question to ask exactly what humanity is?

When you seriously look at it, is there no-one on this planet that is responsible for the aforementioned, blatant contradiction?

Keep in mind, these are questions, not statements. Ask yourself if an African gets the same treatment as an actor, then ask if that constitutes justice in the eyes of humanity or not. I really don't know.

I don't think you can say morality was 'invented' by humans. It's an adaptation that has helped us survive by strengthening our social bonds. I think it's rather humourous that the ability to feel other people's pain probably derives from the same part of the brain that allows us to 'love' houses or have relationships with deities who aren't actually there.

In the context of this discussion when I say our side of the fence, I mean those who believe morality is human and those who think morality belongs to god. Of course I may be doing you the discourtesy of mistaking you for a word-for-word fundamentalist and if I am, sorry about that. We would agree that there are atheists and theists and that we are all human. But christian theists typically devalue human capacity for goodness.

I'm not sure if I understand your response to my 'sickness happens it's no one's fault' comment. You seem to be attempting to back me into a corner by suggesting that any sickness uncured reflects on the weakness of human morality. I agree there are deficiencies but there are amazing things being done. As an animal evolved to manage small groups I tend to think we have trouble handling the concept of vast numbers. I remember when the tsunamis hit Asia a few years ago it had less impact on me that the bushfires in Victoria last year. The tsunami killed hundreds of thousands and the bushfires hundreds. I wasn't being evil - but one was local and one remote.

I think you do know that poor people in remote areas of the world getting less medical care than rich people who live near hospitals is wrong. I think it's wrong myself.

And throughout this I don't think the fact human morality is family/tribe-based first suggests we are more or less immoral as much as points to the way our ethical system has evolved to work.

I donate to doctors without borders and the Sydney City Mission myself. But more than both to my mother.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

"Experiments are the only means of knowledge at our disposal. The rest is poetry, imagination." Max Planck