Atheists and morality

How do atheists define what is right and wrong and why it is right or wrong and why that even matters because its all just chemicals anyway

Other urls found in this thread:

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Natural_law
youtube.com/watch?v=u_LHwKxcOIM
twitter.com/SFWRedditVideos

They don't have an objective answer to this. Just the limp wristed 'be nice guiz'.

Stoning women to death is right because Allah told me so.

based entirely on the popular ethics and laws of the the time. legalize murder or rape and they would instantly find a way to justify it simply because its allowed.

Because Jesus has a whole list of rules where he will punish and torture you in fire if you don't follow his rules,but he loves you and he needs money.

Using the NAP

you have the mental age of a tween. when will you faggots realized that you have been jewed to the point of rejecting god and being virgin NEETs

>How do atheists define what is right and wrong
Feelings

We've evolved, been able to differentiate basic principles of right vs wrong. Being an atheist has no moral principles, it's just the lack of belief in a god/gods. The well-being of individuals is a good start.

I forgot more than you know,fagboy.

Read some books,grow a pair,then come back. You are literally retarded.

Beliive that.

> pic related
> also humies be social animal
> right wrong defined from current law/rules agreed upon in civilization

How do theists do it? It doesn't come from the text, otherwise christians would be stoning faggots and avoiding bacon.

So if not for religion people would be stark raving mad rapists and murderers with no moral compass?
How fucking old are you people.

Jesus was a Jew.

Give all your money to the church, goy.

Be meek and turn the other ass cheek so the Muslim invaders can enter easier, goy.

Even the pope is cucked beyond any kind of belief.

lol did you really just write that out, complete a cpatcha, and click post

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Natural_law

Only Muslims are super crazy,oh and Mormans.

Do unto other as you would like done unto you to an extent (sadism, etc.). In addition don't do things that jeopardize your freedom. Be cool.

You couldn't carry my balls in a wheelbarrow kid. Quit while your behind.

>literally just about to post this

Splendid.

why are atheists so reliant on media viewpoints? its like they all get their thoughts from cartoons and (((mainstream))) news stories designed to make you think that christianity is a liberal religion.

I'm atheist but I grew up in a christian society so I abide by those rules. Is like being religious but without the God part.

don't be an ass

if you're an autist you should know what that means

There's no answer but I'd rather try to find it than take the word of some ancient scroll as fact.

Facts are cartoons? Go chase Pokemon kid.

the fact that you think this way proves that white society is fucking doomed. too scared to take the word of your fathers, so you decide to "find it for yourselves", despite being painfully average beta faggots that live through media and internet forums. you wont find shit thinking that youre the first person to come along thinking the way you do. millions of men have have the same thought and got nowhere with it.

what makes you all so special?

Easy empathy. Look it up faggz

I volunteer with the homeless even though I'm a pretty busy person, and I'm atheist. What do you do, other than posting on a sexist, racist, xenophobic, and otherwise generally intolerant internet board, my moral superior?

Better to build off what the scrolls get right than abandon them altogether

>Go Chase Pokemon Kid
Absolute gold

When was the last time you stoned someone? Ethics are a moral construct.

>spews beta angst all over the place
>"beta faggots"

White ppl pay taxes,raise their kids,and make legal $. I know that makes you eek and ook,and it should.

Self preservation. Most if not all morals are implicitly rooted in self-interest, either for short-term preservation or long-term preservation. An easy example is murder. By attempting murder, you risk: Being injured in the process, being killed in self-defense in the process, succeeding but having your victim's loved ones injure/murder you, and of course, serious prison time.

In the long term, even if you do pull off the perfect murder, you are contributing to a higher murder rate in your local area, and decreasing the quality of life for not just others, but yourself. The same logic applies to theft, rape, and other charges.

It's humanity's aversion to risk of death/injury which illustrate morality on the whole.

are you fucking bots

what do these posts MEAN

When was the last time you stoned someone for working on the Sabbath? Morals are clearly a social construct.

Morality is a social tool. If you live alone in the woods with no human contact, you don't need morality. Humans are social animals, endowed by evolution with a suite of social emotions ranging from guilt, anger, gratitude, compassion, vengeance, shame, etc. They exist because they produce useful moral behaviors. If you hit someone, you're liable to get hit back. If you can credibly demonstrate that you don't hit people, unless they hit you, then you're less likely to get hit. Truly amoral people are rare and often end up dead or in jail because morality doesn't exist to preserve others, but rather to preserve one's self in a society of one's peers.

Atheists and the religious both derive their morality from the same place, which is a combination of inborn instinctive morality and the social norms in which one was brought up. The difference is that religious people back their morality up by saying that an all powerful being is watching, so you best behave. As an atheist, I recognize that most of my moral values ultimately derive from Protestant religious traditions and represent social institutions built up over centuries by believers.

Modern standards of morality would not exist without religion and philosophy, but that doesn't at all prevent the nonreligious, any more than it prevents the non-philosophical, from adopting the same standards as those people around them. Also, knowing that morality is a social tool doesn't change the fact that I *feel* that something is moral or immoral, because I'm still guided by the same moral emotions as every other neurotypical human.

We don't, just use common sense

I agree. A lot of secular humanist values - many of which I subscribe to - are compatible with a lot of New Testament teachings.

Modern Christians are already picking and choosing their own moral codes, whether they like it or not. We're just doing the same thing without a god.

If you aren't capable of discerning what's right/wrong by yourself, you're at the very least a minus habens.

YEAH, WHO NEEDS CRITICAL THINKING ANYWAY!

Religion doesn't own morality, and the average person regardless of religious upbringing already has a preset of values laid out for them if they were raised within society. The exceptional person who cares about fully owning themselves will give thought to the matter, and come to their own conclusions independent of any groups.

>How do atheists define what is right and wrong

Ask Eric Clanton, atheist ethics professor extraordinaire! Actions speak louder than words tho.

Just understand how an individual is supposed to generally behave in your particular society and it usually works out. . . I don't think you need religion to figure that out unless you have autism

i guarantee that neither of you know the meaning of these phrases. fuck off reddit.

I guess my PhD in computational neuroscience and artificial intelligence was wasted if I still can't pass a Turing test.

How do Christians?

Leg It.

>What is "Right"
Things that help the tribe
>What is "Wrong"
Things that hurt the tribe

It's not complicated.

youtube.com/watch?v=u_LHwKxcOIM

But who or what is instilling values, and what values? Bill Nye? MSM? And by what standard should I accept your set of them? This is pretty much the postmodern speed bump.

Well son,it's simpleWhite ppl get up everyday and go to work.The money they make is taxed for gibs.

So when whitey is working their taxes pay for the food clothing and shelter of lazy niggers.

Niggers leach of taxpayers. Whites pay taxes.

It's not rocket surgery.

>writes that you should accept your "father's" words without question or critical thought
>gets called out on ignorance
>NUH-UH U DONT KNOW WHAT UR TALKING ABOUT

Learn 2 ethics

Not him but
>But who or what is instilling values, and what values? Bill Nye?
Well if you're going to be silly then why even ask? Atheists don't find one person to blindly follow.

>How do atheists define what is right and wrong
By how many shekels it gets you.

you see, they are simply smarter than everyone else, and can tell good from bad without any outside influences. its not laws or social pressure that prevents them from murdering people, its just that they know right from wrong lol!

just wait. in 10 years guns will be outlawed when thousands of atheist faggots lose their will to live and go on killing sprees over some sense of superiority they feel over everyone else. however, most of them will be marxist antifa types, so i guess Sup Forums atheists arent really the problem there since you all love white society and its laws so much.

Burger van over there is an idiot. Anyone who manages to bring "beta" into a debate on atheistic morality is a fucking moron. It's like the second Godwin's Law ffs.

Are you saying niggers are stupid?

Everybody knows that.Just say it.

In the atheistic worldview, the concept of a moral wrong only means "something I don't like," because if it meant "something that ought to not be," that would imply there is a way that our actions "ought to be." But if our actions, or even the universe itself "ought to be" a certain way, that further implies that there is a cosmic plan for human beings, their moral behavior, and even the universe itself. And if there is a cosmic plan then that implies the existence of a cosmic planner, or what we call God.

They may say "there are no absolutes" yet that itself is an absolute statement.Or they say "you should never impose your morality on other people" which is itself a moral prescription. In rejecting morality, people must paradoxically embrace a morality that is opposite and equally imposing.

lol if you corrected "fathers", i was talking about all of your dads, if you even knew them that is. other than that, your post is shit and you are a shining example of why canada needs an IP range ban.

>How do atheists define what is right and wrong

by realizing that there is no right or wrong

Reciprocal altruism, at least in theory.

You don't kill me, I won't kill you.

christians used to hang niggers where i come from, until atheist yankees came along and forced us to stop.

so whats your argument here?

burn people who disagree with me is ok

wow, what a convincing argument. and you sound like quite a paragon of morality.

ITT: Religious idiots who think that some book written by humans who believe in a sky ghost 3000 years ago holds more value than atheist humans today just trying not to be dicks to everyone.

Some actions are morally better than others. From this statement alone we reason that there is an ultimate good. An ultimate good cannot just be an idea. It must be, in effect, a personality with consciousness and free will. The rain isn't morally good even though it makes the crops grow; a tornado that kills isn't morally evil--though it may be an evil for those in it's way. Happy and sad events, from birth to death, just happen, and we ascribe moral qualities to them as they suit us or don't. But true, objective good and evil, in order to BE good and evil, have to be aware and intentional. So an ultimate moral good must be conscious and free; it must be god.

How do Christians define whether if what is right is so because god arbitrarily chose so or because morality surpasses even an omnipotent god, and so he chose what was right before he chose it?

i bet you think supporting gay marriage "rights" is a necessary aspect to morality.

People usually recognize evil, even if they are reluctant to recognize good. Some might look at an apparently heroic action and imagine a selfish motive behind it--the desire for fame, or praise, or monetary reward. Few people, however, will hesitate to call evil by its name. Yet, once they have done so, they have placed themselves in a bind. They have bound themselves by law. Because evil is possible only as the perversion of something good, the opposite of something good, the denial of something good. Once people acknowledged a transcendent standard of good, they themselves have placed the world under a law.

They can't escape the bind by saying that law exists, but merely as a utilitarian stopgap, to ensure the safety of the greatest number of people either. For even then they are invoking transcendent standards: the notion, for example, that the greater good: or that anyone should be concerned with another person's safety. Utilitarianism cannot suffice to prevent murder or theft, because some individuals sometimes find these actions quite useful. Yet they are actions universally condemned, by civil law and common morals. Such condemnations are among the moral truths that human beings naturally know. -These norms witness something that philosophers describe as "natural law."

Your ppl are weak faggots.
Somebody told you something?
Haha.

Feelings. Atheism erodes into nothingness since it has no defined standard, because it's founded on relativism.

Atheism is cultural suicide. Christianity has a foundation that is generally accepted and spells out degeneracy pretty well.

They can't

they're just operating on the corpse of Christianity and too dumb to realize that this is where their moral base comes from for the most part

Morality is subjective and we make up for ourselves what is right and what is wrong as we go through life.

This is something I've been grappling with

I am an atheist, although I appreciate traditional values. I would join an orthodox churh but I simply do not believe

I believe there is no true truth in this world. Everythig is relative. Its true if you want to say you are a different gender technically who is to say you can't be. If you want to be poly and have infinity partners who is to say that's not right?

But this sort of relativism is juvenile. Its like a chikd learning to swear. Sure you COULD do those thigs, but they are destructive. They lead to civilization decay and collapse. Questioning everyhing leads to you pretending Islam is as virtuous as liberal western democracy

Only when you start to realize civilization is built upon tradition do you realize relativism is a cancer.

Our life is like a game of hockey. There are set rules to play the game. When you start asking why the rules are there and say 'why cant I pick up the puck with my hand and throw it in the net'the game loses its meaning and you turn to nihilism

i think a "live and let live" mentality is a key component to morality, yes.

>you see, they are simply smarter than everyone else
You said it, not me.

>and can tell good from bad without any outside influences.
There's more to it, but I think you're getting it.

> its not laws or social pressure that prevents them from murdering people, its just that they know right from wrong lol!
Oh wow, you DO understand it. Good job, buddy.

>just wait. in 10 years guns will be outlawed when thousands of atheist faggots lose their will to live and go on killing sprees over some sense of superiority they feel over everyone else.

Oh goddamit I got trolled on Sup Forums

>so i guess Sup Forums atheists arent really the problem there since you all love white society and its laws so much.

Praise KEK

then you are a fucking moron and you deserve whats coming to you.

>See the downfall of Sweden for details

In the simplest sense, its basic empathy. "No one wants to be murdered, therefore we shouldnt allow murder"

The foundations of Natural Law predate Christianity.

It's also the foundation for Western morality and law, especially in the United States.

But y'all keep pissing on each other, it's amusing to watch.

and you're a frightened little "beta", but idc, it's you that has to live that way.

wow so thanks for cutting the most important part of my post out of your autistic screed here

What is right and wrong?

I think it's subjective. And who is right to tell me what's wrong? Nobody.
Fuck You.

>They may say "there are no absolutes"
There may be, do you know of any?
>yet that itself is an absolute statement.
stating there are no absolutes isn't a moral rule, it's an opinion.

>In rejecting morality, people must paradoxically embrace a morality that is opposite and equally imposing.
Example?

frightened of what? goyim can go extinct for all i care, i just thing the world will be a boring place if that happens. why sabotage your own people? or are you even white at all?

You are full of hate just as the Bible commands, my friend. Good, good.

I'm curious, by your logic, do you also believe in the existence of a conscious ultimate evil? How do you know which one is the ultimate good and which is the ultimate evil? Sure, you can say that some actions are morally better than others, but throughout history, standards of morality have been different and actions that were once righteous are now heinous. How would you explain this evolution in morality?

I said this exact thing in my previous post and I'm an atheist. We're not all fedoras.

You're upset I didn't take you seriously in your silly shitpost? WAH. What part did I take out that offended you faggot

frightened of the gays, of god, of other races and immigrants, etc. crying about "muh white extinction" as if that's ever going to happen. it's pretty pathetic.

How else would you explain that everyone thinks differently about morality?

I'm just saying my sense of right and wrong might be different from someone else's.

>what is right and wrong
social mores are not religious mores, retard

That which causes suffering is wrong, and that which eases suffering is right. Yes, everything is just chemicals, but knowing pain is a chemical reaction doesn't make being kicked in the balls hurt any less. Not believing in objective meaning doesn't mean not believing in subjective meaning.

Probably the same way the people that wrote religious texts did when they wrote out how the people that read them were supposed to think: common sense. If you need a book to tell you how to act like a human being and treat others with kindness, then you are critically fucked in the head.

No I think evil is ultimately a deprivation of good. It's not something that exists on its own but is merely the absence of good. I disagree with this idea that societies throughout history have had radically different views on morality. With a careful eye I think you'll see that they're remarkably similar in the things they value with the perversions being a rarity. You'll never find a society that praised cowardice and reviled bravery for example, and it's very hard to find a society that relished thievery and murder. People have always recognized that sort of stuff as bad even when it was tolerated.

That's really fucking stupid. Would you suddenly decide raping kids is ok if someone pointed out a bible verse okaying it, or would you continue not to because you know it's wrong regardless of what the bible says?

True morality is not based on the hope for a reward or fear of punishment. People who need god in charge of morality are afraid of taking the responsibility for acting morally themselves and promoting morality in others without any supernatural sticks or carrots.

Kek, top rocket surgeon here. Can confirm.

>it's another christcucks need a sky-dwelling sugardaddy to tell them how to act with dignity episode

>who or what is instilling values

For atheists specifically? That is an individual pursuit if the person wishes to divert. A lot of them don't, at least not in full. In general, common morality has very complex origins. Think about when you were a child and your parents or other authority figures disciplined you to instill a proper way to behave. Eventually you began to distinguish between what actions are and are not acceptable within the context of other people. As you grew older, indoctrination continued to settle on you in a similar manner, albeit coming from different sources.

I am not setting out any absolute values for people to follow. I only encourage more to seek out their own. The average will remain average if they resolve on blending with even the most obscure tribes. The truly rare can only wholly relate to themselves.