• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

What would you do

Epic Beard Man

Bearded Philosopher
I'm glad you are a religious person, then. It is unfortunate that you are not actually moral enough not to steal unless you think you are being threatened by a deity.

I am not a religious person. I have no religion. I’m moral because it’s the right thing to do and I understand that there is retribution behind wrong actions whether in this life or the next. I help people because I care, but I’m aware if I intentionally harm people then I too will be harmed either in this life or the next. None of us act in absolute altruism.
 

Epic Beard Man

Bearded Philosopher
This post is a perfect illustration of why secular humanism is morally superior to religion. The humanist does what is moral because he/she wants to and believes in improving the world. The religious person does what is moral out of fear of punishment from God.

My post is not religious. I never implied a religious foundation. Since my time here I’ve told people I’m an agnostic-theist and no, I’ve met some horrible atheist who act with no thought of others. My post does not say humanism is morally superior and the fact that a humanist would think their views is superior means they are no different than the religionists who thinks their moral views are superior.
 

Epic Beard Man

Bearded Philosopher
Wouldn't you feel bad if someone stole from you? Is that not enough to make you not want to steal from others?

I believed that growing up without being in a religious family.

My own co-workers (at least one) have stolen out of my duffle bag at work. People steal from each other all the time. I’m sure people have stolen from you and continue to steal from you, it’s just different forms of theivery. Do I think stealing is wrong yes? But if someone robs a bank for some reason like money for food I have no qualms.

If someone robs me at gunpoint for my car I wouldn’t feel bad. It’s the society we live in. I don’t know what put it in your mind that I would steal from people now.
 

Epic Beard Man

Bearded Philosopher
It's disconcerting to think there are those who only don't murder, rape, and steal because they believe an angry god will punish them for it.

I have no desire to hurt others because humans have a sense of empathy (probably developed out of and in conjunction with the formation of larger social groups/societies and the need for trust and dependence on others to make such complex social structures function). I can understand through having felt pain that my actions can cause others pain (whether that be physical, emotional, financial, etc.), and I don't want to do that because I know it's unpleasant and that I wouldn't want to experience it myself... so others probably don't want to either.

Religious teachings can certainly help to instill moral codes in people... but don't make the mistake of thinking they're the only source of morality.

Do people think somehow they are moral out of a vacuum? You are so-called moral because someone who taught someone who taught someone who taught your guardians or whoever cared for you taught you right and wrong. There is no objective moral psychopathology. Who knows? The chain of moral teaching you have learned could have been influenced by a belief system which believes in an angry god.

Btw what makes God angry if there is retribution? I’ve never met a judge who sat on me in judgment and got mad at me.
 

Epic Beard Man

Bearded Philosopher
This is exactly what I already believe wholeheartedly. That there simply are no such things.


If I knew it absolutely, without a doubt - well... that'd actually make very little difference from where I am at now. I hold out a very small sliver of a percent chance that "God" as even vaguely described by most people exists... and that only because I acknowledge that I can't claim to know with 100% certainty.


My first inclination is to assess you as not a very particularly principled or strong person, morally. If only your religious convictions and fear of reprisal gives you pause on moral matters, then I dare say you actually have no morals. However, as others have said - my guess is you wouldn't find yourself turning to a life of immorality if it were proven to you that God doesn't exist. My best guess is that you found religion as a reason supporting the moralistic person you wanted to be... rather than being moralistic because you found religion.

I am spiritual not religious. As I’ve said here as nauseous, one cannot under an accurate description of a person based off a hypothetical and not really know the person. I should have put more thought in this thread and used this as an experiment. For some of the people who claim to be atheist or a religious many are inferring a lot of judgment on me (without questioning my intent) which is something quite often somatic religionists do.
 

Epic Beard Man

Bearded Philosopher
I would try to plug up the hole myself by convincing people there is reason to do good. I always want to set a good example. I don't think humans are inherently evil - I don't think cavemen killed off each other. Anyway... hopefully I could be good.

Humans are not inherently good either.
 

Epic Beard Man

Bearded Philosopher
I’m wondering if you had a few bourbons too many when you posted this or it’s what you really believe?

No. I think I’m seeing a pattern now. I think people are responding if I knew at 36 years of age if God didn’t exist if I would do this now. SMH

Let me clarify if my development as a child into adulthood I somehow knew there was no god and living and growing up how I grew up, I would certainly turn to a life of crime. But I’m established and I on a professional level help people. The psychopathology of all human beings is that morality is taught not inherent. Even then all morality is not equal. I’m sure a nationalist thinks focusing on their country is a moral thing.

Evil people have a distorted sense of morality. You see, I happen to live in reality unlike some of you. I work in the inner city where desperate people rob other people. So I can understand why people act without no sense of repricussion.
 

wandering peacefully

Which way to the woods?
Do people think somehow they are moral out of a vacuum? You are so-called moral because someone who taught someone who taught someone who taught your guardians or whoever cared for you taught you right and wrong. There is no objective moral psychopathology. Who knows? The chain of moral teaching you have learned could have been influenced by a belief system which believes in an angry god.

Btw what makes God angry if there is retribution? I’ve never met a judge who sat on me in judgment and got mad at me.

There are plenty of studies showing infants and toddlers showing dislike for immoral behavior. That is part of our instinctual traits. Why do you suppose humans survived for 2 million years before language and religions became part of the human experience?
 

Unveiled Artist

Veteran Member
Okay.....

By God I’m referring to a deity with absolute authority of this universe (or other universes). Supreme ruler. Self-aware, cognizant of all things. Creator and judge over the affairs of human behavior.

By gods I refer to a pantheon or a specific deity among the pantheon that is designated a judge over human behavior.

Shrugs. Do you have a definition of the deity or are you asking a what-if playing with concepts?
 

A Vestigial Mote

Well-Known Member
I am spiritual not religious. As I’ve said here as nauseous, one cannot under an accurate description of a person based off a hypothetical and not really know the person. I should have put more thought in this thread and used this as an experiment. For some of the people who claim to be atheist or a religious many are inferring a lot of judgment on me (without questioning my intent) which is something quite often somatic religionists do.
I give not one sliver of a crap whether you identify as "religious" or "spiritual" - neither of those have concrete meaning, and are pretty unimportant without understanding further context, etc. - which you even hinted at in your reply - the fact that you were butt-hurt because I "didn't understand you." You want me to ask the umpteen thousand questions I would need to in order to understand your "spirituality?" I'd obviously rather not... but just let me know.

The idea still stands that you POINT BLANK said you would rob people if it weren't for a deity holding a standard of morality over you. That's what you said. Which is the same as saying that something you cannot prove to even exist, cannot have any idea the true aspects of, something that very VERY closely resembles PURE FICTION... THAT is what you say you base your decision to be a moral person on. It is, quite frankly, asinine. You can be as non-religious as you want to be. I'll STILL rain down judgment on you based on a statement like that. You don't have to care... but I do, and I'd stand by such judgment day in and day out.
 

It Aint Necessarily So

Veteran Member
Premium Member
I had no idea people of faith actually thought this way. Maybe the OP is joking?

I've read it many times from many authors. I see it as a case of stunted moral development. Absent any religious notion of a judgmental eye-in-the-sky performing continuous surveillance of ones thoughts and actions, we develop an internal moral compass, assuming that role ourselves and becoming autonomous moral agents.

But how can one ever expect to develop an authentic and adult moral faculty if he believes that his choices are made for reward or to escape punishment. To maintain that attitude into adulthood is infantilizing. Isn't that how a child makes decisions?

Religious teachings can certainly help to instill moral codes in people... but don't make the mistake of thinking they're the only source of morality.

Or the best. Aren't we seeing that here?

As I’ve said here as nauseous

FYI: I believe that the phrase you were looking for is ad nauseam, or, to the point of nausea.
 

9-10ths_Penguin

1/10 Subway Stalinist
Premium Member
Is anyone else disturbed by how many religious people claim they would be going out, committing horrible crimes if they lost their faith? If nothing else, the best proof that God exists is that he's making so many sociopaths religious so as to protect the rest of us.
I would be worried if they were being sincere, which I don't think most of them are.

For the ones who really do mean it, yeah - it's a bit worrying. They're basically admitting that they have no empathy.
 

sealchan

Well-Known Member
My own co-workers (at least one) have stolen out of my duffle bag at work. People steal from each other all the time. I’m sure people have stolen from you and continue to steal from you, it’s just different forms of theivery. Do I think stealing is wrong yes? But if someone robs a bank for some reason like money for food I have no qualms.

If someone robs me at gunpoint for my car I wouldn’t feel bad. It’s the society we live in. I don’t know what put it in your mind that I would steal from people now.

I was thinking more about this question...I think it is likely true that consequences rendered by some group are always ever-present so how could I truly say what I would do without such a threat of consequence.

But it seems that religion only takes the question to a "higher" level and people find their way to justify murder on down for God.

The trick with our free will is to establish habits which divert us from situations which tempt us to do wrong even if others do so. True, the fact of being a victim is a strong inducement to do the same and one often has little control over the environment in which they must make their moral choices.

Also moral choices are often complex as an act of theft might yield a good such as feeding one's family when no other recourse is available. In that context moral laws falter, hence why we have judges, humans who apply some measure of oversight to the robotic and inevitably limited value of moral laws.

So I guess, speaking to the OP, it is probably necessary to have some sort of "higher power" whether civil or faith based in order to have the sufficient desire to raise one's moral fortitude above average. This requires a lifelong self-awareness of forming habits and cultivating an empathy with others such that you and the others are equals. This is the basis, IMO, for individual moral development.
 

Epic Beard Man

Bearded Philosopher
There are plenty of studies showing infants and toddlers showing dislike for immoral behavior. That is part of our instinctual traits. Why do you suppose humans survived for 2 million years before language and religions became part of the human experience?

I would have to see those studies (I do research actually) however I am aware of a Yale study regarding cognition and the idea of babies born with an innate sense of morality. However, these studies do not answer the psychopathology of sociopathic disorders that exist in children. These maladaptive disorders as we see in research such as antisocial personality disorders do exist in children despite having a loving parental environment.
 

Epic Beard Man

Bearded Philosopher
I would be worried if they were being sincere, which I don't think most of them are.

For the ones who really do mean it, yeah - it's a bit worrying. They're basically admitting that they have no empathy.

Again the failure for people to understand that others may commit crimes circumstantial is not that elusive. People read what they want to read I see. Our own president lack empathy when last year for victims of a natural disaster he passed out paper towels as if he is shooting jump shots. Me in this hypothetical talking about robbing banks although in jest and hypothetically, speaks on the desperation many students face with growing student debt, low pay and high rent cost.
 

Unveiled Artist

Veteran Member
This whole thread is hypothetical I am still scratching my head....

Morality, hypothetically, is from god. So without god, we would have no sense of morality. This is assuming the christian god. I dont know how jews and Muslims view gods morals since they are both not defined in human non prophetic term.

Of course morality exists without a deity concept but to many that makes no sense. Creator creates morality in deciding the behaviors and ethics of and for believers.

I honestly want more Muslim and jewish views of god. I'm not sure what a deity is but I assume their definition is closed because it's not defined by and in the name of a human.
 

Epic Beard Man

Bearded Philosopher
I give not one sliver of a crap whether you identify as "religious" or "spiritual" - neither of those have concrete meaning, and are pretty unimportant without understanding further context, etc. - which you even hinted at in your reply - the fact that you were butt-hurt because I "didn't understand you." You want me to ask the umpteen thousand questions I would need to in order to understand your "spirituality?" I'd obviously rather not... but just let me know.

The idea still stands that you POINT BLANK said you would rob people if it weren't for a deity holding a standard of morality over you. That's what you said. Which is the same as saying that something you cannot prove to even exist, cannot have any idea the true aspects of, something that very VERY closely resembles PURE FICTION... THAT is what you say you base your decision to be a moral person on. It is, quite frankly, asinine. You can be as non-religious as you want to be. I'll STILL rain down judgment on you based on a statement like that. You don't have to care... but I do, and I'd stand by such judgment day in and day out.

That’s fine regardless of your view but we all are grounded by conditions based on our moral view. Our behaviors are indeed conditioned based upon our environment, not butt hurt but you did lack understanding. There are many professionals that exist today that would do either something similar or worse and yes many of us are grounded by conditions based on our fundamental understanding of divine retribution.

There are very few people who do good for the sake of good and most people obey laws because of two things conditioning, and positive reinforcement. So you can right in cap locks all you want it doesn’t change the fact my views are no different than the many.
 
Top