Morality (charity) Without God?

  • Thread starter Thread starter tomaskovarik
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
T

tomaskovarik

Guest
I have been thinking (and reading stuff) on ethics and morality and I came to the conclusion that one cannot have morality without God. I am going to use the word “ethics” here more in the sense of “charity”, although the two words are equivalent in meaning. In other words, there is NO impetus or motivation for ethical behavior, especially charitable behaviour (I am not talking about things like “don’t kill”, which could be explained by upbringing, environment, genetic inheritance, social darwinism etc.).
I am talking about the kind of ethics which goes beyond of what is just “abiding by the laws” or “preservation of society”.
If there was no final “assessment” by God of our behavior on this Earth, there wouldn’t be any need for charitable or even ethical behaviour.
The laws of jungle, the competition, the survival instinct, the hedonistic pleasure seeking would be the motivating force for life conduct. Even things like “do good unto others” could be done simply because if I do good unto others, there is a good chance that “others would do good unto me” and so, again, there is no intrinsic charity in this one (or similar maxims).
There seems to be a force that propels us to know (and try to do) what is “good” (whatever the meaning of that is), almost everybody agrees on basic facts about what constitues good and evil. I see that force as originating with God…this goes symbolically to the garden of Eden and the tree of knowledge between good and evil (as belonging only to God).
Any thoughts?
Tomas
 
Any utilitarians about? 😃

I tend to agree that there is no basis for self-sacrificial behavior without God. I’ve tried to reason to a purely atheistic ethic… but it just doesn’t work as far as I can tell.

I’d like to hear some arguments to the contrary though… if there are any. I think it may be interesting to discuss.

God bless,

Agricola
 
40.png
Agricola:
Any utilitarians about? 😃

I tend to agree that there is no basis for self-sacrificial behavior without God. I’ve tried to reason to a purely atheistic ethic… but it just doesn’t work as far as I can tell.

I’d like to hear some arguments to the contrary though… if there are any. I think it may be interesting to discuss.

God bless,

Agricola
Click to expand...
Most arguments (agains my thesis) come from Social Darwinism, Cultural and environmental influences, a genetically ingrained need for species preservation, upbringing, there are some psychoanalytic explanations (charity as a psychological compensation for some fixation).
But yes, I wonder if there are any utilitarians here who could expand on this. As a point of interest, I have to mention that I come (was born and grew up in) an atheistic country and I have not seen any “worse ethics” among atheists than I see among believers. this would suggest that my thesis is wrong, that there is no correlation between ethics and faith in ultimate justice, but
that is not the issue here.
The issue is about motivation, and I am claiming (until someone shows me otherwise) that I cannot see a motivation for charitable acts (charity as a higher stage of morality, devoid of any benefits to the charity doer) apart from faith in a transcent God who is the ultimate source of goodness
Tomas
 
tomaskovarik said:
I have been thinking (and reading stuff) on ethics and morality and I came to the conclusion that one cannot have morality without God. I am going to use the word “ethics” here more in the sense of “charity”, although the two words are equivalent in meaning. In other words, there is NO impetus or motivation for ethical behavior, especially charitable behaviour (I am not talking about things like “don’t kill”, which could be explained by upbringing, environment, genetic inheritance, social darwinism etc.).
I am talking about the kind of ethics which goes beyond of what is just “abiding by the laws” or “preservation of society”.
If there was no final “assessment” by God of our behavior on this Earth, there wouldn’t be any need for charitable or even ethical behaviour.
The laws of jungle, the competition, the survival instinct, the hedonistic pleasure seeking would be the motivating force for life conduct. Even things like “do good unto others” could be done simply because if I do good unto others, there is a good chance that “others would do good unto me” and so, again, there is no intrinsic charity in this one (or similar maxims).
There seems to be a force that propels us to know (and try to do) what is “good” (whatever the meaning of that is), almost everybody agrees on basic facts about what constitues good and evil. I see that force as originating with God…this goes symbolically to the garden of Eden and the tree of knowledge between good and evil (as belonging only to God).
Any thoughts?
Tomas
Click to expand...
Hello.

Could anyone please give me good rebuttals to arguments that humans only need to follow the golden rule to be good, not God, which makes religion unnecessary. If you can cite good examples to prove your points, it would be much appreciated.

Thanks
 
preyoflove said:
Hello.

Could anyone please give me good rebuttals to arguments that humans only need to follow the golden rule to be good, not God, which makes religion unnecessary. If you can cite good examples to prove your points, it would be much appreciated.

Thanks
Click to expand...
The church/God/ religion does not own morals and good behaviour.

You can be a good person who is charitable and empathetic without religion. I know many.
 
lemongrass80 said:
The church/God/ religion does not own morals and good behaviour.

You can be a good person who is charitable and empathetic without religion. I know many.
Click to expand...
It’s a circular argument because would they be charitable and empathetic without God? In other words does their morality come from an inner search for God? The only way to prove it would be to prove there is no God and that is not possible.

I agree with the OP without God morality would be an undefinable principal and that is proven by how the secular constantly attempts to redefine what we consider moral. In this world abortion is moral to the secular world, gay marriage is moral n the secular world, and the secular world is moving towards genetic engineering which will have severe consequences. Is it even too far fetched that if trends continue that insest or sex with children would be ok in the secular world?

God’s law sets boundaries and defines morality without him we would be lost.
 
1ke said:
Ah, but what is good? That is indeed the quetion.
Click to expand...
Golden rule

Funny thing about prisons are they are full of God believers and no atheists. (Make up barely 0.08% of prison population)
 
1ke said:
Again, what is good?

Abortion? Euthanasia? Same sex marriage?

You give me an atheist who believes these are “good” and I’ll give you one who believes they are not.

Again, what is good?
Click to expand...
Give me a Christian who says all those are good and I will give you one who says they are not.

Good is a term used to describe morally acceptable behavior. Who defines good? Everyone.

I define what is good based on my personal experiences and you define good based on yours. When people in societies disagree on what is good, the viewpoint espoused by the people with the most authoirty takes over. In our society, we allow people and communitites to police themselves through a constitution which can be ammended at any time by the people. For questions of interpretation of that document, we have a court which is charged with safeguarding invididual rights against unfair overreach of others, whether they be states or private actors.

So in summation, Good is what you make of it
 
tomaskovarik said:
I have been thinking (and reading stuff) on ethics and morality and I came to the conclusion that one cannot have morality without God. I am going to use the word “ethics” here more in the sense of “charity”, although the two words are equivalent in meaning. In other words, there is NO impetus or motivation for ethical behavior, especially charitable behaviour (I am not talking about things like “don’t kill”, which could be explained by upbringing, environment, genetic inheritance, social darwinism etc.).
I am talking about the kind of ethics which goes beyond of what is just “abiding by the laws” or “preservation of society”.
If there was no final “assessment” by God of our behavior on this Earth, there wouldn’t be any need for charitable or even ethical behaviour.
The laws of jungle, the competition, the survival instinct, the hedonistic pleasure seeking would be the motivating force for life conduct. Even things like “do good unto others” could be done simply because if I do good unto others, there is a good chance that “others would do good unto me” and so, again, there is no intrinsic charity in this one (or similar maxims).
There seems to be a force that propels us to know (and try to do) what is “good” (whatever the meaning of that is), almost everybody agrees on basic facts about what constitues good and evil. I see that force as originating with God…this goes symbolically to the garden of Eden and the tree of knowledge between good and evil (as belonging only to God).
Any thoughts?
Tomas
Click to expand...
Yes. And as St a John tells us, “God is love”. Mans justice, what makes us just, is defined by love, and this is the reason why the greatest commandments are what they are. And this is the basis of the New Covenant, “Apart from Me you can do nothing” (John 15:5); man was made for communion with God; our wholeness, our moral integrity, depends upon this relationship that was shattered at the Fall. Until that relationship is reconciled man is lost.
 
Birdpreacher said:
Give me a Christian who says all those are good and I will give you one who says they are not.
Click to expand...
yes, of course.
Birdpreacher said:
Good is a term used to describe morally acceptable behavior.
Click to expand...
Who defines morally acceptable?
Birdpreacher said:
Who defines good? Everyone.
Click to expand...
If everyone, then no one.
Birdpreacher said:
I define what is good based on my personal experiences and you define good based on yours. When people in societies disagree on what is good, the viewpoint espoused by the people with the most authoirty takes over. In our society, we allow people and communitites to police themselves through a constitution which can be ammended at any time by the people. For questions of interpretation of that document, we have a court which is charged with safeguarding invididual rights against unfair overreach of others, whether they be states or private actors.

So in summation, Good is what you make of it
Click to expand...
Which is why there can be no morality without God. Without an objective, authoritative source of morality, you are left with opinions.

God is the author of what is good. Without God, we cannot know what is good.

That is what Genesis communicates to us. That is why Jesus said no one is good except God alone.
 
lemongrass80 said:
The church/God/ religion does not own morals and good behaviour.

You can be a good person who is charitable and empathetic without religion. I know many.
Click to expand...
You can be good to a certain degree, just as it suits you to be good.

It does not suit God that you can dispense with his existence, and you do that at your peril.
 
For me, it depends on what you mean “without God”.

Is it possible to be moral without the existence of God? I don’t believe that it is, because I believe that He is the author of Good. (More on that, later.) But is it possible to be moral without believing in God? Undoubtedly.

That doesn’t mean the non-believer isn’t sinful in someway, but there isn’t a single person walking this earth who isn’t. There are some non-believers who are more charitable than many Christians who consider themselves devout.

That being said, I try to be good. I try to show compassion and love to my fellow man and help them when I can. If tomorrow, there was some undeniable proof that God did not exist, not much would change. I would still try to do the same things I do now, because I believe they are right; with or without the existence of God.
 
preyoflove said:
Hello.

Could anyone please give me good rebuttals to arguments that humans only need to follow the golden rule to be good, not God, which makes religion unnecessary. If you can cite good examples to prove your points, it would be much appreciated.

Thanks
Click to expand...
Could you first tell me why humans need to follow the golden rule to be good? What makes the golden rule good?

The peace of Christ,
Mark
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top