Secularism and morality

[johnhanks]

This thread is intended to move an off-topic discussion from the Evolution vs Creationism forum to a more appropriate place. The story so far:

• It has been claimed that secularisation leads / has led to moral decline (in the US at least, for which allegedly supporting statistics have been cited).
• I have countered by citing research comparing religious nations to less religious nations (and within the US religious states to less religious states): this research shows the opposite to be true - secular societies perform more strongly than religious ones on a wide range of moral criteria, including homicide rates, incarceration, divorce rates, domestic violence, altruism and support for minority rights. A good summary can be found here.

Underlying all this is the argument over whether moral codes are strictly human inventions, or are absolute mandates imposed by divine authority. As a liberal-leaning atheist, I obviously adopt the former position, and will be happy to debate it further should anyone take up the challenge.

 

[viole]

This thread is intended to move an off-topic discussion from the Evolution vs Creationism forum to a more appropriate place. The story so far:

• It has been claimed that secularisation leads / has led to moral decline (in the US at least, for which allegedly supporting statistics have been cited).
• I have countered by citing research comparing religious nations to less religious nations (and within the US religious states to less religious states): this research shows the opposite to be true - secular societies perform more strongly than religious ones on a wide range of moral criteria, including homicide rates, incarceration, divorce rates, domestic violence, altruism and support for minority rights. A good summary can be found here.

Underlying all this is the argument over whether moral codes are strictly human inventions, or are absolute mandates imposed by divine authority. As a liberal-leaning atheist, I obviously adopt the former position, and will be happy to debate it further should anyone take up the challenge.

I think that it is pretty obvious that (free) secularism does not lead to moral decay.

I come from Sweden; namely a country in which belief in a personal God is vanishing. We do not seem to be on the verge of moral chaos. Where I come from, local breaking news usually concern the weather or aurora alerts for the tourists and virtually no civilian needs a gun if not for shooting moose.

However, I am a bit skeptical about statistics. For instance, it is pretty easy to think that there are more rapes in Sweden than in Pakistan, if we forget what happens to women who report rapes in both countries.

So, the best way is to actually experiment by spending some time in a very secular (free) country before drawing conclusions.

We should also be very skeptical about threats of moral decay if a certain ideology X or religion Y is abandoned. I cannot think of a single dictatorship (ranging from fascist Germany to Communist Russia) that did not use this trick to keep people at their place (who wants to be immoral?) by continually showing the alleged moral decadence of foreigners who do not subscribe to their ideology. Usually, all those ideologies use their arbitrary definitions of what constitutes objective morality.

Of course, the big question is: do free countries become secular because they start enjoying a higher quality of life, especially in terms of social welfare and security, or is the other way round?


Ciao

- viole

 

[LuisDantas]

Religion may be useful for the development of morality, but that is not due to belief in God, which is generally actually detrimental to it.

Belief in God is usually a distraction from morality, and often enough an actual corruptor. Some people can use it constructively, but it is not only not an universal occurrence, but really quite rare. Belief in God is to be accepted, but not pursued.

However, morality is not arbitrary. It is created and shaped by solid ecological, economic and biological restrictions imposed by natural laws and by the environment. It is bound by parameters that change due to demographic factors and technological possibilities, among others.

 

[Sunstone]

Belief in God is usually a distraction from morality, and often enough an actual corruptor. Some people can use it constructively, but it is not only not an universal occurrence, but really quite rare.

I agree. I've often enough seen more or less decent people take indecent positions apparently due to their belief in one or another morality they believed to be god-ordained.

 

[johnhanks]

I think that it is pretty obvious that (free) secularism does not lead to moral decay.

Yes, I think it's pretty obvious too. But not to everyone, it seems.

 

[Sees]

I am a religious person and a theist who thinks we live by human moral codes and ethics. The type, degree, or lack of theism does not dictate moral excellence or the goodness of society.

 

[johnhanks]

However, morality is not arbitrary. It is created and shaped by solid ecological, economic and biological restrictions imposed by natural laws and by the environment. It is bound by parameters that change due to demographic factors and technological possibilities, among others.

I'm with you on this one, but I'd like to distinguish between use of the word morality to describe a universal human faculty (the ability - drive, even - to identify certain behaviours as right or wrong) and using the word in the sense of the specific rights and wrongs of a given culture's moral code. I agree with you completely that the latter is strongly tied to a culture's socioeconomic and ecological circumstances, and changes as those circumstances change.

 

[samosasauce]

There are genetic morals, or morals passed down to every human (who has a functioning brain). People without natural morals are a minority and exception...

 

[idav]

Morality coming from one entity cant really work as absolutes do not work. Unless this entity is going to be there at every turn writing the exceptions to the rules since every scenario requires thought and consideration. It isn't even safe to just go by the heart. The only time people might need an all judger of truth and justice is when they are too young to understand why we do things. Santa and god being the source for morality is like telling a kid "cause I said so" which might work for a while til they grow a brain. We must well understand why something is wrong and not go by the whims of our heart or some dated book.

 

[ChristineES]

People with no religion can have ethics. It is taught by parents and peers.

 

[Kilgore Trout]

Unless and until some type of evidence arises which actually indicates that a divine authority even exists, it's safe to say that moral codes are the invention of human beings.

 

[LuisDantas]

People with no religion can have ethics. It is taught by parents and peers.

And by experience, perhaps most of all. Most of my ethics I had to deduce.

 

[bobhikes]

However, I am a bit skeptical about statistics. For instance, it is pretty easy to think that there are more rapes in Sweden than in Pakistan, if we forget what happens to women who report rapes in both countries.

This is my feeling, there's a lot more involved in morality then just religious beliefs. Wealth, culture, and education to name a few.

 

[samosasauce]

People with no religion can have ethics. It is taught by parents and peers.

Ethics a\have evolutionary advantages anyway. Many ethics are generally accepted across the board and have places in the brain which promote them; as noted by many a psychologist/neurologist.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

There are genetic morals, or morals passed down to every human (who has a functioning brain). People without natural morals are a minority and exception...

And we have names for them, such as anti-social and psychopath.

 

[gnostic]

If someone is a sociopath...which I hoped is in a minority...he or she couldn't distinguish right from wrong. But is even worse if the sociopath have the religious tendency, which can feed on his delusions, making matters worse.

 

[gnostic]

People with no religion can have ethics. It is taught by parents and peers.

True, Christine.

However, not every parents or peers are good. They are humans after all.

If you have parents who are drunk or abusive, then they are not good role model in matter of ethics. The same with peers.

There are too many variables in which morality can go all awry. So not everyone are lucky to have understanding or good parents or peers.

So it really depends.

 

[MD]

Too much secularism leads to moral decay, and lack of cohesion amongst members of a society. These members have very open apathetic lives, without much meaning and focused on hedonism. As such their population growth stalls and in time they are lost to history. We are witnessing this first hand in the west and especially in Europe, the slow death of its culture. The old culture of Europe will fade away in a 100 years and only exist in books and videos.

Too much extremism leads to destruction too as we are seeing in the middle east, so a good balance is important.

Morality is relative, but secular fundamentalists deny that morality even exists aims to make most members in its society amoral. This is why they like to deny the existence of God, to further their own agendas.

 

[LuisDantas]

Too much secularism leads to moral decay, and lack of cohesion amongst members of a society.

It actually doesn't, unless you are calling something quite exotic by that name "secularism".

These members have very open apathetic lives, without much meaning and focused on hedonism. As such their population growth stalls and in time they are lost to history. We are witnessing this first hand in the west and especially in Europe, the slow death of its culture. The old culture of Europe will fade away in a 100 years and only exist in books and videos.

Too much extremism leads to destruction too as we are seeing in the middle east, so a good balance is important.

Well, I guess this settles it. Whatever you are calling secularism, isn't.

Morality is relative, but secular fundamentalists deny that morality even exists aims to make most members in its society amoral. This is why they like to deny the existence of God, to further their own agendas.

Dude, do they sell tickets to that world you live in? I have never been there. If they breath air and have compatible food I would like to be there for a short while.

 

[idav]

Too much secularism leads to moral decay, and lack of cohesion amongst members of a society. These members have very open apathetic lives, without much meaning and focused on hedonism. As such their population growth stalls and in time they are lost to history. We are witnessing this first hand in the west and especially in Europe, the slow death of its culture. The old culture of Europe will fade away in a 100 years and only exist in books and videos.

Too much extremism leads to destruction too as we are seeing in the middle east, so a good balance is important.

Morality is relative, but secular fundamentalists deny that morality even exists aims to make most members in its society amoral. This is why they like to deny the existence of God, to further their own agendas.

What in the heck are you talking about? It doesn't hurt people for them to realize morality really comes from humans. You even mentioned the middle east where they supposedly hold a high moral standard.

Relative morality and saying it doesnt exist is much the same thing. Relative to the needs of a given culture and not some objective truth like people want it to be.