• 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
Of course I don't know you. Everything I know about you has been derived from what you wrote in the OP. However, based upon what you DID write (that the only thing stopping you from stealing or assaulting other people is a fear of God's punishment) you describe a person without the ability to empathize. Whether or not how you grew up contributed to this lack of empathy, I have no idea and it really doesn't matter for the purpose of this discussion.

And this is ALL about empathy. IF the only reason you don't treat people in negative ways is because you're afraid that you won't get away with it, THAT indicates a serious lack of empathy. Atheists such as myself have no fear of any god punishing us, yet we do NOT indulge in robbery or assault every time we think we can 'get away with it'. That indicates that it's our ability to put ourselves in another person's shoes that prompts us to do the right thing, not a fear of retribution.

I'm sure that you've done great things for humanity, but it's rather childish to start claiming that you've done more for humanity that I have in my entire life x2. But even if you could establish that, from what you wrote in the OP it has little to do with empathy and everything to do with pleasing a god figure.

Of course my background is relevant because you using something which is hypothetical and not real to infer who I really am. In subsequent posts I’ve claimed our actions are conditional and substantiated by our situation. Our circumstances such as desperation and hopelessness can indeed affect our empathy.
 

Epic Beard Man

Bearded Philosopher
I do not believe in stuff after I die. So I would do the same as I do now. I like to be a nice person, because that is my nature.

Being kind is learned it was never inherent if that was true humans would not be affected with anti-social personality disorders in childhood so that narrative is false.
 

Epic Beard Man

Bearded Philosopher
Incorrect. I know for a fact I am morally superior to you, because I don't believe in a god that will judge my "sins" and yet I treat people with decency and kindness. You said that if you believed what I believe, you'd be a bank robber, and that the only thing that stops you from harming others is the belief that a god will punish you. I believe in not harming others because I have this thing called empathy and a conscience.

No, in your mind you are morally superior but a belief in an incorporeal deity does not make me impotent or being moral. I also stated that morality is learned so someone who taught someone who taught someone who taught your mom or dad or guardian or even community, also taught you.

With that being said there is no superiority in that regard because the same moral teachings whether it’s religiously based or not, has the same effect. The effect is to do good and omit a pleasurable response. What you do presents the same conditions as the religious Catholic that goes to Sunday mass. Only a delusional atheist such as yourself would render morality in such regard.
 

Epic Beard Man

Bearded Philosopher
I think we all live in unjust systems of one type of the other. Unjust systems breed despair and despair creates all kinds of bad things, both in those who suffer and everyone else.

Toxic environments lead to toxic thoughts. I often think that the world isn't supposed to be like this, but not many people are working to fix it. As long as someone's trying though, it's worth living. That's my thoughts at least.


I think everyone has the feelings sometimes. We can think what makes us different from those who act on those feelings though. Talking to people who "lost it" at one point or another makes us realize how thin the line can be. Yet for some reason we don't cross it. I'd like to think that conscience is the strongest. I keep thinking about honor sometimes... some people think it's a throwback to a primitive time, but I think it's much more than that. Our societies have just lost their honor codes of the past... I can't help but think that the baby got lost with the bathwater.

I encourage you whenever you come to Los Angeles California to take a visit to my hospital. I extend that invitation to anyone here. People live in a bubble and even some of our directors and policy makers we deal with definitely live in a bubble. I live in a society where newborns take AK-47 bullets to the chest so the conscience of some people are absent.

I strongly don’t think many people here live in the world.
 

Rational Agnostic

Well-Known Member
No, in your mind you are morally superior but a belief in an incorporeal deity does not make me impotent or being moral. I also stated that morality is learned so someone who taught someone who taught someone who taught your mom or dad or guardian or even community, also taught you.

With that being said there is no superiority in that regard because the same moral teachings whether it’s religiously based or not, has the same effect. The effect is to do good and omit a pleasurable response. What you do presents the same conditions as the religious Catholic that goes to Sunday mass. Only a delusional atheist such as yourself would render morality in such regard.

LOL. As usual, you're avoiding the crux of the issue. You said you would be a bank robber if you didn't believe in divine judgment. I DON'T believe in divine judgment, and yet I am not a bank robber, in fact, I am a kind and decent person who does not harm others.

To elaborate further, the goal of humanist morality is to help people for the sake of helping them, without worrying about a deity. The goal of religious morality is to either get a reward from God or avoid a punishment from God. So, of course secular humanism is a superior moral system. In a secular humanist moral system, being good to others is the ultimate goal, or end, of the moral system. In a religious moral system, being good to others is the means to an end (avoiding punishment from God), but not the ultimate goal of the moral system itself.
 

QuestioningMind

Well-Known Member
Of course my background is relevant because you using something which is hypothetical and not real to infer who I really am. In subsequent posts I’ve claimed our actions are conditional and substantiated by our situation. Our circumstances such as desperation and hopelessness can indeed affect our empathy.

Actually, it isn't. It might explain WHY you have a lack of empathy, but all I pointed out is that your OP suggests that you HAVE a lack of empathy, since you state that it's only the threat of punishment from God that keeps you from treating other people poorly.
 

Dawnofhope

Non-Proselytizing Baha'i
Staff member
Premium Member
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.
It’s a great point. We’ve grown up on different sides of the tracks. Faith in the God of Abraham of various shades can really assist us rise above much that we grow up with. If it weren’t for my faith I’d be prone to chronic neurosis and bouts of severe depression. Instead I’m a ‘professional’.
 

Unveiled Artist

Veteran Member
I see your point and I’m not confused by it, although we’re both saying the same thing the usage of the word survival makes things sometimes complicated.

Remember I grew up in the inner city, so my perspective of survival is different than yours. So although you may not consider me robbing a bank is not essential to my survival, consider the circumstances of the poor and the hopeless.

Skid row is very famous in Los Angeles for having rows of homeless families on a sidewalk. Consider their circumstances and what they’re willing to risk to rid themselves of being impoverished. Some homeless people are willing to lie to rid themselves of their circumstance even if it’s for three days.

I remember at work I get irritated every time our frequent flyers would come in and lie about being suicidal and after I would evaluate them, would ask for an inordinate amount of food. Well, it took me a good four years to come to terms with the fact that people use the system to rid themselves of their circumstance even if it’s for a few days.

We place them on 5150 holds and they have room and board for three days. Some “play crazy” to avoid jail time, but I used to get angry (sometimes I still do) why people like these use the system. To me, in my mind this is excessive, for them it is survival. For these people who some use drugs which in turn does create real psychosis develops the problem of sustaining oneself on the streets.

People do what they can to survive from moment to moment so in going back to my example, a person like me who is in a desperate position and who has lives the inner city life and understands the lack of opportunities for many individuals with criminal records from their perspective, robbing a bank is excessive. It only appears that way because robbing a secured banking system is not the norm (although sadly poverty is) so to us “normal people” it’s excessive but what about the desperate?

I think that is the element people miss here in the hypothetical. Even an authority figure like God has not stopped people from committing the most heinous crimes in human history.

True. Ive grown up in mess and was homeless.

Another way to put this is murder is wrong because someone elses life dies at another person hands (the act of killing is wrong) but people do it to survive-self defense, food, etc.

I just dont excuse the imorality of murder in and of itself based on whether it is used to kill or save a baby. A life was taken regardless.

That does not mean we need to treat them all the same. I would never tell someone who murdered to save her child is the same as someone who murdered for self-inflicted non necessary reasons.

The difference is, that doesnt change the nature of murder itself (or thief etc) just how we as a society judge whether what action is right or wrong.

I almost lost my home, didnt have clothes, nor food until the Church helped me out. If I were desprite, of course, food and shelter would be top than philosophizing moralityo f the issue.

My point is, regardless my actions and situation, that doesnt change the nature of the action-which I feel the action is wrong no the intent of going through with it.

I dont see stealing as right based on the situation. I see how it is justified thats moral or immoral; and, I agree with the justication not the action.

Think about it. If stealing wasnt immoral, we would do it without laws inposed on our actions. Since it is immoral by law, we judge the punishment by its intent and justification not the immoral act itself.
 

Unveiled Artist

Veteran Member
I see your point and I’m not confused by it, although we’re both saying the same thing the usage of the word survival makes things sometimes complicated.
Remember I grew up in the inner city, so my perspective of survival is different than yours. So although you may not consider me robbing a bank is not essential to my survival, consider the circumstances of the poor and the hopeless.

Skid row is very famous in Los Angeles for having rows of homeless families on a sidewalk. Consider their circumstances and what they’re willing to risk to rid themselves of being impoverished. Some homeless people are willing to lie to rid themselves of their circumstance even if it’s for three days.

I remember at work I get irritated every time our frequent flyers would come in and lie about being suicidal and after I would evaluate them, would ask for an inordinate amount of food. Well, it took me a good four years to come to terms with the fact that people use the system to rid themselves of their circumstance even if it’s for a few days.

We place them on 5150 holds and they have room and board for three days. Some “play crazy” to avoid jail time, but I used to get angry (sometimes I still do) why people like these use the system. To me, in my mind this is excessive, for them it is survival. For these people who some use drugs which in turn does create real psychosis develops the problem of sustaining oneself on the streets.

People do what they can to survive from moment to moment so in going back to my example, a person like me who is in a desperate position and who has lives the inner city life and understands the lack of opportunities for many individuals with criminal records from their perspective, robbing a bank is excessive. It only appears that way because robbing a secured banking system is not the norm (although sadly poverty is) so to us “normal people” it’s excessive but what about the desperate?

I think that is the element people miss here in the hypothetical. Even an authority figure like God has not stopped people from committing the most heinous crimes in human history.

Long story short: Justification (hunger) for stealing doesnt make the act (taking something that does not belong to you) right, just the justification for it (for food).

Some things I agree with the justification like stealing for food. Others I do not, like death penalty. They are both bad actions, but I agree and understand the intent of the former outweighs the immoral action itself.

Which is important: the intent or the action. We flip flop all the time.
 

SomeRandom

Still learning to be wise
Staff member
Premium Member
Interesting then how do God’s view rightness and wrongness? Shiva, the destroyer doesn’t sound too nice so obviously from the perspective of an onlooker this deity is capable of obliterating things surely these things are ascribed to someone with some idea of rightness and wrongness.
.
Umm the entire point of Hinduism is to be destroyed. That's the ultimate reward. To obliterate the essence of your human self and become one with God, the Universe, the atom whatever. To be destroyed is to achieve ultimate enlightenment.
Shiva is called the destroyer because he destroys the ego, the thing holding humans back from achieving spiritual truth. As a personality He is generally meditative, calm and benevolent though. Very forgiving and all around a soft touch.
Bouts of anger notwithstanding. But theoretically you can still achieve the ultimate goal and be a collosal douche.
You're trying to interpret Eastern philosophy through a specific Western lens. Quite the inaccurate translation to say the least.

Edit: Out of curiousity I did some minor research and in Hinduism there is a god called “Yama” which is a deity of justice. So it would seem this deity would have some sort of idea of justice and judgment.

Again approaching it from a Western standpoint. If one believes in the samsara (eternal cycle of rebirth and death) retribution is merely a purification of the soul before it has another try. I mean there are various hells, but they're never permanent. Even the most heinous individual is given like a bijillon chances. So justice and judgement are more accurately translated as concepts like a grading system. The worse you do, the longer you spend trying again I guess. But there's certainly no fear from any Hindu of divine retribution for their actions. Maybe once they die they may be a little concerned, I dunno.
 

stvdv

Veteran Member: I Share (not Debate) my POV
Being kind is learned it was never inherent if that was true humans would not be affected with anti-social personality disorders in childhood so that narrative is false.
You know best about your "nature", I know best about my "nature". Let's agree to disagree.
 

Jumi

Well-Known Member
I encourage you whenever you come to Los Angeles California to take a visit to my hospital. I extend that invitation to anyone here. People live in a bubble and even some of our directors and policy makers we deal with definitely live in a bubble. I live in a society where newborns take AK-47 bullets to the chest so the conscience of some people are absent.
Of course the politicians live in a bubble. Even in countries with less hellish places the politicians have no care or understanding for the suffering they perpetrate. About your place, I can only admire your strength to survive in such places and that your desire to help people there. Not much I can say or judge about it.

I strongly don’t think many people here live in the world.
It's different for all of us. Not all my friends and classmates survived to adulthood. Although they weren't constant, there were chances to get killed as a kid and you develop some sense of danger. It eats you up inside. Of course my country's worst places don't compare at all to what you've described in your posts. I know for sure that lots of folks reading have even less idea about it. There are many man-made hells in this world.
 

A Vestigial Mote

Well-Known Member
.. it doesn’t change the fact my views are no different than the many.
Which is, in my opinion, one of the saddest facts about "spiritual" people that there is. Again, in my opinion, their morality is then predicated on a lie - it is teetering on the head of a pin, and it means those people are one true revelation away from jumping on the bandwagon of gutting society for their own personal gain.

It is one of the reasons I despise the religious (or even "I'm spiritual") mindset - it is a sophomoric take on the world - that you require some "extra" layer of reality in order to feel that you have responsibility to it or a place in it. The religious and spiritual are like naive children, running around pretending they can become "adults" through something akin to "enlightenment" - another nearly worthless group of ideas that mean so little even as people give them such grave importance and weight, and think of it as such a "deep" thing.

Religion is just noise distracting you from a very simple and undeniable fact. You are a human being. No more. But more importantly... no less.
 

Epic Beard Man

Bearded Philosopher
You said you would be a bank robber if you didn't believe in divine judgment.

True. But I also said (subsequent to me saying this) this thread was a hypothetical and not gospel.

I DON'T believe in divine judgment, and yet I am not a bank robber, in fact, I am a kind and decent person who does not harm others.

I'm not a bank robber as well. I haven't hurt anyone and I continue to help people.
 

Epic Beard Man

Bearded Philosopher
Actually, it isn't. It might explain WHY you have a lack of empathy, but all I pointed out is that your OP suggests that you HAVE a lack of empathy, since you state that it's only the threat of punishment from God that keeps you from treating other people poorly.

Actually it is. This thread is hypothetical and does not speak for me now, but it is an inference to how believers can potential check their moral positioning in the world based on following authoritative law. The entire basis of this thread is to demonstrate that righteous and wrongfulness are circumstantial and conditionally based.

I can most certainly ask why do people obey laws?

For the most part to avoid jail and infractions and of course to prevent harm towards others (but our judicial system heavily influenced the aforementioned). What keeps you from killing people, or stealing, or the like? Surely you have moral beliefs set in place to mitigate the action to harm, but most importantly there are conditions in your life that keep you from doing such acts.

So I ask why don’t you run red lights?

You don’t want to cause an accident as well as get a ticket. In most things involving criminal activity we don’t do those things because we appeal to authority. I see no different in a bank robbery scenario.
 

wandering peacefully

Which way to the woods?
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.


Yes, it seems to be a luck of the draw when it comes to personality disorders. And I agree with you of course, about nurturing and also being guided about right from wrong from a very young age. But I absolutely believe this can be done without instilling a fear of God watching your every move and giving children the idea that there is eternal retribution or reward for their actions. I think most people regardless of their religious beliefs want to be good for the sake of being good. It just feels better to know you are not hurting others or doing things which feel "wrong" on the inside. There is I think, that innate feeling in most people. But if one is exposed to violence and abuse by their parents it may destroy that inner feeling and lead to bad behavior and self loathing. Not always. Just as a loving upbringing does not always lead to good behavior later on. It is most likely a genetic defect or maybe environmental factors. As you were alluding to in your comments, poverty and lack of education, growing up in a crime ridden area can lead to parents who fail to give proper guidence to their children who then repeat the same pattern. It's poverty and poor education owhich is mostly to blame I would think. Not a lack of belief in a god. I apologize for jumping to conclusions about your OP but it read as though you were serious about it.
 

Epic Beard Man

Bearded Philosopher
It’s a great point. We’ve grown up on different sides of the tracks. Faith in the God of Abraham of various shades can really assist us rise above much that we grow up with. If it weren’t for my faith I’d be prone to chronic neurosis and bouts of severe depression. Instead I’m a ‘professional’.

That is my point. Religion has its place to mitigate wrong action. The laws of God are obeyed, wrong action does not happen. The laws of God are meant to help humans to remain cognizant of what God has established (at least that is the opinion). But all morality is conditional and in part based on some form of an appeal to authority whether it’s divine or man-made.
 
Top