Conservapedia - User contributions [en]

Morality

2009-05-01T20:10:27Z

Efrieum: /* The effects of atheism */

'''Morality''' is a concern with what is right and what is wrong in one's personal conduct; it is usually contrasted with [[ethics]].

== Morality versus law ==

Jurisprudence is traditionally (but not completely) divided between those who advocate Natural Law and those who advocate Legal Positivism. Both agree that morality is distinct from the [[law]], but it is only advocates of Natural Law who believe that law should be based on morality, whereas Legal Positivists believe that there is no inherent connection.
Natural Law supporters point to examples such as [[slavery]], which was once legal in many places, but is now illegal, because people had the law changed because they considered slavery immoral. A legal positivist would not argue against there often being a causal connection between morality and law, as clearly according to this example and many others there is, but would say that there is no ''inherent'' connection: and thus say that law is not based on morality.

The most commonly used example to illustrate the difference between the two camps is to imagine a scenario where a law against vehicles being used in a town centre after 21:00 were to be instituted, in an effort to reduce pollution. Then, imagine that someone is caught in the town centre after 21:00 riding a bike. An advocate of natural law would suggest the person not be punished, because bikes do not cause pollution, and it was reduction of pollution that was considered the moral issue in making the law. A legal positivist would instead look to whether or not a bike is a vehicle as defined by the statute, and base punishment on that.

Natural Law theorists would argue against those who say that the law should not be used to enforce morality.
Instead they believe that morality is actually the basis for much of the law.
Laws against theft, for example, are based on the idea that taking someone else's property is morally wrong.

==Morality based on theistic religion==
[[Image:Hitlerspeech.jpg‎|thumb|300px|right|In his work ''Mein Kampf'', [[Adolf Hitler]] wrote that the "great masses of people do not consist of philosophers; precisely for the masses, faith is often the sole foundation of a moral attitude. The various substitutes have not proved so successful from the standpoint of results that they could be regarded as a useful replacement for previous religious creeds. But if religious doctrine and faith are really to embrace the broad masses, the unconditional authority of the content of this faith is the foundation of all efficacy."<ref>http://www.hitler.org/writings/Mein_Kampf/mkv1ch10.html</ref>]]

Thomas Brewton points out that things like the [[Ten Commandments]] or the [[Code of Hammurabi]] were sets of rules to establish moral behavior, enforced in the context of religion.<ref>The Conservative Voice: [http://www.theconservativevoice.com/article/9332.html "Morality and Political Order"] by Thomas Brewton</ref>

According to some theists, only by basing morals on [[God|God's]] standards can morality have any sort of absolute basis.
Janine M. Ramsey:
{{QuoteBox|Evil and good do objectively exist because they emanate from the fact that there is an unchanging, omniscient (all-knowing), and holy God. These are not subjective opinions invented and written down by man. Rather, ‘good’ expresses the innate characteristics of God Himself that He has built into every human being, and every human being is responsible to live up to those standards. And the absence of good defines evil.<ref>Ramsey, 2004</ref>}}

One standard objection to this view is the Euthyphro dilemma, posed by Socrates in the dialogue Euthyphro, in which Socrates asks whether a thing is made pious (or just, right) because the Gods love (approve of, command) it, or if the Gods love certain things because they are just and right. If the latter, then it seems that God's commands would not be objectively valid, but arbitrary whims. If the former, then morality has an independent existence from God's commands; God is good because God always does the right thing, but they are not made the right thing simply because God commanded them. Morality would then need to have some further, independent ground which might be discoverable independent of religion.

==Morality based on evolution==
Some [[biology|biologists]] argue that morality grew out of behavioral rules shaped by [[Theory of evolution|evolution]]. They see social behaviors displayed by some [[primate]]s as the precursors of human morality. They cite examples such as [[rhesus monkey]]s which, when given a chance to get food by pulling a chain that delivers a shock to another monkey, have been known to [[starvation|starve]] themselves for a considerable time.<ref>"Primates and Philosophers" by Frans de Waal</ref>

Dr. [[Frans de Waal]] argues that primates are social animals, and must constrain their behavior in order to live in a group. He maintains that these constraints have shaped behaviors from which human morality has emerged. He does not assert that chimpanzees are moral, but argues that emotional bases that can be observed among primates are the foundation for the evolution of human morality.

He points to the display of both [[empathy]] and self-awareness among apes, and asserts that human morality begins with a similar concern for others and the understanding of social rules about the treatment of others. <ref>New York Times: [http://www.nytimes.com/2007/03/20/science/20moral.html?pagewanted=1&ei=5124&en=84f902c89c5a9173&ex=1332043200&partner=permalink&exprod=permalink "Scientist Finds the Beginnings of Morality in Primate Behavior"]</ref>

However, these arguments presume evolution to be true.
The stance that God created such creatures to act in a way that we would consider moral has at least as much scientific validity as the evolutionary position.

Evolution actually provides no basis for morality:
{{QuoteBox|'''Jaron Lanier''': ‘There’s a large group of people who simply are uncomfortable with accepting evolution because it leads to what they perceive as a moral vacuum, in which their best impulses have no basis in nature.’ 
'''Richard Dawkins''': ‘All I can say is, That’s just tough. We have to face up to the truth.<ref>'Evolution: The dissent of Darwin,’ ''Psychology Today'' 30(1):62, January/February 1997, quoted in ''Creation'' 20(3):44, June 1998.</ref>}}

Peter Singer argues that a distinction must be made between the origins and the justification of morality, allowing that evolutionary explanations can be given for the existence of brains or minds able to reason, and hence able to determine what is moral, but that morality has its own logic and is not determined by contingent facts of evolution.<ref>The Expanding Circle: Ethics and Sociobiology, 1983</ref>

== Morality based on atheism ==

The basis of morality for some [[atheism|atheists]] is their own opinion.
[[Bertrand Russell]], for example, said that his opinions on right and wrong were based on his feelings.<ref>'''Bertrand Russell:''' You see, I feel that some things are good and that other things are bad. I love the things that are good, that I think are good, and I hate the things that I think are bad. I don't say that these things are good because they participate in the Divine goodness. 

'''Frederick Copleston:''' Yes, but what's your justification for distinguishing between good and bad or how do you view the distinction between them? 

'''R:''' I don't have any justification any more than I have when I distinguish between blue and yellow. What is my justification for distinguishing between blue and yellow? I can see they are different. 

'''C:''' Well, that is an excellent justification, I agree. You distinguish blue and yellow by seeing them, so you distinguish good and bad by what faculty? 

'''R:''' By my feelings. 
(1948 radio debate; http://www.bringyou.to/apologetics/p20.htm)</ref>

In practice, they may adopt the morality of the society they grew up with, which in the case of the Western society is generally one with a Christian heritage.
[[Richard Dawkins]] said, "I’m a passionate Darwinian when it comes to science, when it comes to explaining the world, but I’m a passionate anti-Darwinian when it comes to morality and politics".<ref>''The Science Show'', ABC Radio, 22nd January, 2000, quoted by Walker, Tas., [http://creationontheweb.com/content/view/5177 National emergency in Australia], 29th June, 2007. (Creation Ministries International)</ref>

Although atheism provides no basis for absolute morality, this does not mean that atheists cannot be moral people.
Rather, it does mean that atheism itself provides no moral boundaries to constrain the actions of people.
As mass murderer [[Jeffrey Dahmer]] said in an interview:
{{QuoteBox|If a person doesn’t think there is a God to be accountable to, then—then what’s the point of trying to modify your behaviour to keep it within acceptable ranges? That’s how I thought anyway. I always believed the theory of evolution as truth, that we all just came from the slime. When we, when we died, you know, that was it, there is nothing...<ref>Dahmer, Jeffrey, in an interview with Stone Phillips, Dateline NBC, 29th November, 1994 [http://creationontheweb.com/content/view/4145/105/]</ref>}}

Other atheists, such as Peter Singer, argue that our powers of reasoning provide a basis for morality. This view is shared by many theists, such as Richard Hare and Immanuel Kant, who do not deny the existence of God but think that morality is not derived from, but rather is exemplified by, a divine power.

=== The effects of atheism ===

Atheists frequently criticise "[[religion]]", by which they usually mean [[Christianity]], for atrocities committed by adherents of those religions, citing such things as the [[Inquisition]] and the [[Crusades]].
But when atrocities committed by atheists such as [[Joseph Stalin|Stalin]] and [[Mao Zedong|Mao]] are mentioned in return, they wish to disassociate the belief from its adherents.{{fact}}

Whilst atheism didn't directly ''cause'' these atrocities, because athiesm provides no moral boundaries, it ''allows'' these atrocities to occur.
{{QuoteBox|...atheism has been tried as a basis for life in many countries in the 20th century. The results have been some of the biggest bloodbaths of all time under communist despots above the law, e.g., Stalin, Mao and [[Pol Pot]]. For example, the Inquisition killed 2000 people in three centuries; Stalin killed that many before breakfast.<ref>Sarfati, 2004 & 2008. See also Morris.</ref>}}

Once again dishonesty by people only trying to lie to people. Stalin was raised an Orthodox Catholic and never once killed someone because "god does not exist" he killed people because he wanted the government to be the only god.
There is no disassociation because both Pot and Stalin were killing to make their personal power greater. When the Crusades and Inquisition happened it was directly due to the beliefs held by the adherents of the religion. Besides, you would need to conclusively prove that their non-belief in leprechauns was not what drove them to killing.

== Bibliography ==
* Morris, Grantley, [http://net-burst.net/hot/war.htm A History Professor’s Criticism of My Webpage].
* Ramsey, Janine M., [http://creationontheweb.com/content/view/3126 What basis, morality?], 11th May 2004 (Creation Ministries International).
* Sarfati, Jonathan, [http://creationontheweb.com/content/view/2207 Bomb-building vs. the biblical foundation], 24th December 2004 and 2nd December 2008. (Creation Ministries International)

== References ==
{{reflist|2}}

[[Category:Religion]][[Category:Ethics]][[Category:Virtues]]

Atheism and morality

2009-05-01T20:05:53Z

Efrieum: /* Atheism and Uncharitableness */

In regards to '''atheism and morality''', the Barna Group found that [[Atheism|atheists]]/[[agnostics]] in America were more likely, than theists in America, to look upon the following behaviors as morally acceptable: illegal drug use; excessive drinking; sexual relationships outside of marriage; [[abortion]]; cohabitating with someone of opposite sex outside of marriage; obscene language; gambling; pornography and obscene sexual behavior, and engaging in [[homosexuality]]/[[bisexuality]]. <ref>http://www.barna.org/FlexPage.aspx?Page=BarnaUpdate&BarnaUpdateID=152</ref>
Given the [[Homosexuality and Health|many diseases associated with homosexuality]], the [[Bible]] prohibition against [[homosexuality]] is quite arguably one of the [[Bible scientific foreknowledge|many examples where the Bible exhibited knowledge that was ahead of its time]].

Dr. [[William Lane Craig]] states the following regarding the comments of atheist debator Dr. [[Kai Nielson]]:
{{cquote|He doesn’t really defend his point there, but he says, "I have a reason why we should be moral." He says, "It’s in our self-interest to be moral." I was really surprised to hear that coming from him. That sort of purely self-interested motivation for morality is, I think, fatal to the atheistic position because for someone who is sufficiently powerful not to be worried about what others do, self-interest can only lead to a sort of self-aggrandizing hedonism. It leads to the kind of life of a Marcos, a Papa Doc Duvalier, a Mbbutu, and so forth. Self-interest will never be able to justify an ethic of compassion. And so I think that was a fatal admission on Dr. Nielsen’s part for the atheistic worldview.<ref>http://www.leaderu.com/offices/billcraig/docs/craig-nielsen5.html</ref>}}

Dr. Phil Fernandes states the following regarding [[atheism]] and [[Moral relativism|moral relativism]]:
{{cquote|[[Friedrich Nietzsche|Nietzsche]] preached that a group of "supermen" must arise with the courage to create their own values through their "will to power." Nietzsche rejected the "soft" values of [[Christianity]] (brotherly love, turning the other cheek, charity, compassion, etc.); he felt they hindered man's creativity and potential....
[[Image:998086u.jpg|right|thumbnail|150px|[[Bertrand Russell]]]]
Many other atheists agree with Nietzsche concerning moral relativism. British philosopher [[Bertrand Russell]] (1872-1970) once wrote, "Outside human desires there is no moral standard." [[A. J. Ayer]] believed that moral commands did not result from any objective standard above man. Instead, Ayer stated that moral commands merely express one's subjective feelings. When one says that murder is wrong, one is merely saying that he or she feels that murder is wrong. [[Jean-Paul Sartre]], a French [[existentialism|existentialist]], believed that there is no objective meaning to life. Therefore, according to Sartre, man must create his own values.

There are many different ways that moral relativists attempt to determine what action should be taken. [[Hedonism]] is probably the most extreme. It declares that whatever brings the most pleasure is right. In other words, if it feels good, do it. If this position is true, then there is no basis from which to judge the actions of [[Adolph Hitler]] as being evil.<ref>http://www.biblicaldefense.org/Writings/refuting_moral_relativism.htm</ref>}}

[[Evolution|Evolutionist]] and [[atheism|atheist]] [[Richard Dawkins]] stated in an interview: “What’s to prevent us from saying Hitler wasn’t right? I mean, that is a genuinely difficult question."<ref>http://byfaithonline.com/page/in-the-world/richard-dawkins-the-atheist-evangelist</ref> The interviewer wrote, regarding the Hitler comment, "I was stupefied. He had readily conceded that his own [[philosophy|philosophical]] position did not offer a rational basis for moral judgments. His intellectual honesty was refreshing, if somewhat disturbing on this point."<ref>http://byfaithonline.com/page/in-the-world/richard-dawkins-the-atheist-evangelist</ref>

In addition, there is the historical matter of [[Atheism and deception|deceit being used in a major way to propagate atheism from the time of Charles Darwin onward]] plus the issue of [[Atheism and Mass Murder|of atheistic ideology of communism being involved in the greatest mass murder of mankind in world history.]]
==Atheism and Uncharitableness==
[[Per capita]] atheists and [[agnosticism|agnostics]] in the United States [[Atheism and Uncharitableness|give significantly less to charity than theists even when church giving is not counted for theists]].<ref>[http://www.barna.org/FlexPage.aspx?Page=BarnaUpdateNarrow&BarnaUpdateID=272 Atheists and Agnostics Take Aim at Christians] ''The Barna Update'', 2007.</ref><ref>Brooks, Arthur C., [http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qa3647/is_200310/ai_n9340592/Religious faith and charitable giving] ''Policy Review'', Oct-Dec 2003, p.2.</ref><ref>Stossel, John and Kendall, Kristina [http://abcnews.go.com/2020/Story?id=2682730&page=2 Who Gives and Who Doesn't?] ABC News, November 28, 2006</ref>

But why bother with truth right? Atheists have no need to identify themselves as atheists when they donate.

==See Also==
*[[Morality]]
*[[Atheism and Mass Murder]]
{{Nb Atheism}}

== Notes ==
{{reflist|2}}

[[Category:Atheism]]
[[Category:Morality]]

Atheism and Mass Murder

2009-05-01T20:03:45Z

Efrieum: /* See Also */

[[Image:Stalin.jpg‎ |right|200px|thumb|[[Joseph Stalin]]'s atheistic regime killed tens of millions of people.]]
In respect to '''atheism and mass murder''', [[Christian apologetics|Christian apologist]] Gregory Koukl wrote that "the assertion is that religion has caused most of the killing and bloodshed in the world.
There are people who make accusations and assertions that are empirically false. This is one of them."<ref name="Koukl">Koukl, Gregory, [http://www.str.org/site/News2?page=NewsArticle&id=5527 The Real Murderers: Atheism or Christianity?], 1994</ref>
Koukl details the number of people killed in various events involving theism and compares them to the much higher tens of millions of people killed under [[communism|communist]] [[Atheism|atheistic]] regimes.<ref name="Koukl" /> It has been estimated that in less than the past 100 years, governments under the banner of [[communism]] have caused the death of somewhere between 40,472,000 to 259,432,000 human lives.<ref>[http://dspace.dial.pipex.com/finalconflict/fcrevb102.html The Black Book of Communism]</ref><ref>[http://www.fas.harvard.edu/~hpcws/lelivrenoir.htm The Black Book of Communism]</ref><ref>http://www.hawaii.edu/powerkills/COM.ART.HTM</ref><ref>[http://users.erols.com/mwhite28/warstat1.htm Source List and Detailed Death Tolls for the Twentieth Century Hemoclysm]</ref><ref>[http://www.sarasotamagazine.com/blog/template_permalink.asp?id=365 Memory and Ideology]</ref><ref>[http://www.firstthings.com/article.php3?id_article=2526 The Black Book of Communism: Crimes, Terror, Repression]</ref> Dr. R. J. Rummel, professor emeritus of political science at the University of Hawaii, is the scholar who first coined the term democide (death by government). Dr. R. J. Rummel's mid estimate regarding the loss of life due to communism is that communism caused the death of approximately 110,286,000 people between 1917 and 1987.<ref>http://www.hawaii.edu/powerkills/COM.ART.HTM</ref>

Koukl summarized by stating:
{{cquote|It is true that it's possible that religion can produce evil, and generally when we look closer at the detail it produces evil because the individual people are actually living in a rejection of the tenets of Christianity and a rejection of the God that they are supposed to be following. So it can produce it, but the historical fact is that outright rejection of God and institutionalizing of atheism actually does produce evil on incredible levels. We're talking about tens of millions of people as a result of the rejection of God.<ref name="Koukl" />}}
[[Image:Solzhenitsyn.jpg‎|thumb|150px|left|[[Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn]]]]
[[Nobel Prize]] winner [[Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn]] was asked to account for the great tragedies that occurred under the brutal communist regime he and fellow citizens suffered under.

Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn offered the following explanation:
{{cquote|Over a half century ago, while I was still a child, I recall hearing a number of old people offer the following explanation for the great disasters that had befallen [[Russia]]: 'Men have forgotten God; that's why all this has happened.'

Since then I have spend well-nigh 50 years working on the history of our revolution; in the process I have read hundreds of books, collected hundreds of personal testimonies, and have already contributed eight volumes of my own toward the effort of clearing away the rubble left by that upheaval. But if I were asked today to formulate as concisely as possible the main cause of the ruinous revolution that swallowed up some 60 million of our people, I could not put it more accurately than to repeat: 'Men have forgotten God; that's why all this has happened.' <ref>http://www.icr.org/index.php?module=articles&action=view&ID=276</ref>}}
==See Also==
*[[Atheism and Morality]]
*[[Morality]]
{{Nb Atheism}}

Apparently this entire website is hosted by dishonest people. They don't bother to mention the fact that Stalin was an Orthodox Catholic most of his life nor do they mention that he didn't kill in the name of "no gods" he killed in the name of making the government the people's god.

== Notes ==
{{reflist|2}}

[[Category:Atheism]]