Can Objective Morality Exist In An Atheistic World View?

  • Thread starter Thread starter FaithHopeCharity
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Had he lived in the antebellum south, he would have thought slavery was alright.
 
upant said:
What authority do they base these universal judgments on? Does every atheist agree with the same set of morals?
Click to expand...
Authority is a different question. Some atheist systems are not even created by atheists, they just work without reference to God. Kant’s categorical imperative is an example.

As a movement, atheism is hopelessly disunified and inefficient. They do not agree on the same set of morals, and anathematize one another over whether a man in an elevator can ask a woman if she’d like a cup of coffee. That shouldn’t be surprising, though; the Thomists don’t agree with the theistic existentialists on a set of morals either (and Thomists fight amongst themselves too).
 
Last edited:
Define the following and maybe we will begin to have a discussion:

Objective

Morality

Atheistic

Worldview (one word)
 
I’ll take one:
Morality: the evaluation of human actions in reference to the objective good.
 
blackforest said:
I’m not going to defend this argument because it’s riddled with bullet holes. I can usually mention at least one culture that believes it’s “objectively moral” to bury a woman up to her neck and stone her to death for adultery. Amnesty International fights this sort of thing.
Click to expand...
Amnesty International are a great example of ‘making up your own morality as you see fit’.
 
Dan123 said:
Atheists are not infrequently accused of offering nothing more than their opinion as morality;
Click to expand...
I would call this an unfair accusation if the atheist is making and defending an objective moral claim.

Two different things are getting conflated here - objective moral claims and preference claims. Preferences pertain to things like books, movies and ice cream. If I tell you I like to read science fiction, it makes sense if you respond, “That’s your opinion. I like mysteries.”

But some issues aren’t a matter of mere preference. It isn’t my “preference” that children not be sold into sex slavery. I’d instead assert that child slavery is wrong and needs to stop. If I told you that it is an objective moral wrong to enslave children, you would certainly be free to challenge my claim or any “filters” that may affect it. But is the question of whether or not to enslave children an issue of personal preference?
If so, would it be wrong of me to “impose my morality” on child traffickers?

Both atheists and religious people routinely make objective moral claims. But where do rights and wrongs come from? Atheists may say the individual or society. Religious people claim a higher power. I’d argue that the former answer isn’t as stable of a foundation for an argument.
 
Last edited:
blackforest said:
But where do rights and wrongs come from? Atheists may say the individual or society.
Click to expand...
Or they may say that it is based on some other principle that isn’t relativist. Like a Socratic justice system, or an existentialist ethic.
 
blackforest said:
Both atheists and religious people routinely make objective moral claims. But where do rights and wrongs come from? Atheists may say the individual or society. Religious people claim a higher power. I’d argue that the former answer isn’t as stable of a foundation for an argument.
Click to expand...
It might look less stable if you make sure you’re considering all concepts of god/gods across all cultures and history. Then consider all the various denominations of each of those. The moral issues they have in common are the ones you all have in common with atheists too.
upant said:
What’s to stop the atheist from changing their mind about such a heinous crime? They did with the killing of the unborn.
Click to expand...
There’s atheists against abortion, there’s theists for abortion rights. Last I looked Catholics have abortions at basically the same rate as the rest of the country. And you’re saying ‘the atheist’ as if there’s one, it’s not a single person nor is it a monolithic group.

What stops a theist from deciding prochoice is the correct position?
 
Last edited:
Dan123 said:
It might look less stable if you make sure you’re considering all concepts of god/gods across all cultures and history.
Click to expand...
Eh, philosophically that’s not all that important, since all of philosophical theism can be grouped under three systems: polytheism, dualism, and monotheism. Each of them has unique philosophical characteristics. It’s no mistake, for example, that Socrates spends quite a bit of time in Plato’s Euthyphro asking about whether and how the gods disagree regarding right and wrong. He very ably demonstrates the impossibility of universal moral action in polytheism.
 
Last edited:
upant said:
The Christian doesn’t get to make their own moral code. They can only break the one they are given by God.
Click to expand...
Can a Christian convince themselves they’re following the moral code given by God when they are in fact not?
 
Dan123 said:
Can a Christian convince themselves they’re following the moral code given by God when they are in fact not?
Click to expand...
Can a person lie to themself?

We know the sins we have to confess, the Spirit will bring those sins to our attention.
 
upant said:
48.png
Dan123:
What stops a theist from deciding prochoice is the correct position?
Click to expand...
The Christian doesn’t get to make their own moral code. They can only break the one they are given by God.
Click to expand...
There are many different interpretations between denominations within Christianity and very many significant differences between religions. I might remind you that the op didn’t ask if morality could exist outside Christianity, but without God (actually without gods to be more accurate, but we’ll assume he or she meant God).
 
Yes, it can exist and it does: survival of the fittest.

The atheistic world view is ‘red in tooth and claw’, however many social justice clichés its proponents wrap it up in for their Youtube congregations. Thus their obsession for ‘humanely’ killing the weak and vulnerable via euthanasia and abortion.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top