This site makes extensive use of JavaScript.
Please
enable JavaScript
in your browser.
Live
PTR
Beta
Classic
TBC
Classic Theme
Thottbot Theme
If There is No God... (debate)
Post Reply
Return to board index
Post by
blademeld
Yes, in your world, but you don't live alone, you live in a community. I should think.
And other people will judge you based on your actions.
You should do whatever you want, but you have to balance it with the consequences of your actions.
Post by
MyTie
Yes, in your world, but you don't live alone, you live in a community. I should think.
And other people will judge you based on your actions.
You should do whatever you want, but you have to balance it with the consequences of your actions.
Aren't imposed consequences just guides put in place by authority, who have come to the conclusion of right and wrong based on opinions just as flawed as mine?
Post by
Malgayne
This is a bit of a flame-bait thread, intentionally or otherwise. But I'm curious to see where it goes, because I think MyTie and I have the same underlying assumptions about the universe—and the result in both cases is an extreme opposite viewpoint.
The point of MyTie's question is not to propose what would happen if world government collapsed as a simple thought experiment. The point, I believe, is this:
Some people believe in God, and some people don't. No surprise there. But nearly everyone believes that some sort of universal code of ethics or morals, like "doing things which hurt other people = bad" exists. Most believe that governments (and sometimes regular people) have the ability and the responsibility to enforce this code.
So if there's no God, does that mean there's no code, and everyone decides for himself what's right or wrong? Or is there a code? And if so, who decides what it is, and how do you know they've got it right?
This is fundamentally a religious debate, about the nature of God and about the nature of ethics. Debates like this are EXTREMELY likely to offend people, especially when they take place on forums. This is a test. I like to think that we're mature enough to handle this without taking personal shots at anybody. If we can't, this thread will get locked so fast your head will spin, and further debates will be curtailed.
Good luck.
Post by
260787
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
blademeld
Aren't imposed consequences just guides put in place by authority, who have come to the conclusion of right and wrong based on opinions just as flawed as mine?
In a dictatorship, yes. In a democracy, in idealism, the authority is placed by us according to our ethics.
Also, laws are based on examples and practises, even if they aren't perfect, that is, it's impossible to please everyone, it is a base guideline that we can abide by. If a country's laws aren't to your liking, simply leave the country.
If you want a country where murder is right, good luck surviving the next 5 minutes of your new government.
Post by
182246
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
260787
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
172996
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
MyTie
Aren't imposed consequences just guides put in place by authority, who have come to the conclusion of right and wrong based on opinions just as flawed as mine?
Even in a community with no gov't, they will still have social values and morals. If you break them and can't conform to what is socially acceptable, I'm sure you'll be removed.
Yes, that probably is the case. So, where did that society get their rules? Opinion?
My entire point, is that
right and wrong is just opinion
. Whether that is opinion of society, government, religion, the individual, etc. There is no scientific test to set out and prove what is right and is wrong. We also can show that popular opinion isn't always the best, such as Nazi Germany. So, what makes me right? If it is just opinion, then why do I do anything to be right? If nothing I do is right for anything but opinion, then why should I do anything? What is the point of living? What is the point of dieing? What is the point of it all if it is simply arbitrary opinion that will be completely forgotten in a few generations? It is just for instinctual pleasure? That seems trivial.
Edit: @Zap - So we agree that right and wrong is something conjectured from opinions? See above.
Post by
182246
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
blademeld
We also can show that popular* opinion isn't always the best, such as Nazi Germany.
Disclaimer:
*Popularity may change with region and race.
If it is just opinion, then why do I do anything to be right?
You don't have to do anything, your opinion is yours alone.
If nothing I do is right for anything but opinion, then why should I do anything? What is the point of living? What is the point of dieing? What is the point of it all if it is simply arbitrary opinion that will be completely forgotten in a few generations? It is just for instinctual pleasure? That seems trivial.
So are we at "what's the purpose of life" now?
42.
Post by
MyTie
Why does there have to be a predetermined "point" to life? In the vastness of space, everything we do is trivial. Why does that matter?
So, if we have come to the conclusion that there is no point, because space is vast, and right and wrong are opinion, then what happens when we introduce the possibility that there is a God?
Post by
260787
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
182246
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
Random0098
It seems to me that If there is no God, the code of ethics and morals that many people share exists for the following reason:
Over time, the human race has grown steadily towards more and more organized forms of civilization - from its early days of families, to nomadic tribes, to villages, to cities. The human has been shown to be a social animal, and to be a social animal humans live in societies.
But, to successfully live in a society, humans have developed rules and guidelines (our code of ethics and morals) throughout history - rules and guidelines that have also changed throughout history.
It might not have been because we originally felt that some things were "evil" or "morally unethical", it very likely started out that these things were not done because it was found that when doing them, it made the society that the humans lived in more difficult to live in.
Over time, these rules and guidelines or taboos have been accepted as Laws or Sins etc. These Laws and Sins have also changed over time, because our societies have changed as well - leaving different ways to function properly within them. This is also why all over the world, there are different codes of ethics - because societies have evolved differently in those places.
I don't know if all this has been said before in the debate, I didn't really read it. I just read MyTie's post and then Malgayne's.
Let me know if you think I'm on track.
Post by
MyTie
Ok. I think I asked all the questions I wanted to, and hit all the points I wanted to make. /exit
Post by
172996
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
montezuma7
Moral code is whatever you decide is right, on a personal level.
Bingo. This is what I was driving to. If there is no authority (God, government, or otherwise) then people make the decisions between right and wrong arbitrarily.
If that is the case, then is there even such thing as right and wrong, or is it all opinion? If it is all just opinion, can I ignore it and do whatever I feel like?
Yes, you can make up whatever morality you want for yourself and follow that, but if it conflicts with other peoples morality they have decided for themselves then watch out. There will be consequences, either for you or for them, because more than likely you will conflict and one of you will be forced to adapt the other's morality or face some sort of punishment, mistreatement, whatever.
Societies emerge when a group of like minded people agree on a moral code and decide to enforce it and live by it. You can still go against that majority, but will probably hurt yourself in the process.
Just look to history for examples, like the halocaust. Nazis thought it was right to eliminate what they deemed lesser races, and most of the rest of the world said that's not right, and there was a conflict.
Ultimately is up to you to decide your own morals.
Post by
Malgayne
I already gave my example on Nazi Germany. Well they may have been the majority in Germany, they were the minority when compared to the rest of the world. That's why we went to war.
Just look to history for examples, like the halocaust. Nazis thought it was right to eliminate what they deemed lesser races, and most of the rest of the world said that's not right, and there was a conflict.
Out of curiosity, are you proposing that if majority opinion had been that there was nothing wrong with what the Nazis were doing and that it was acceptable for the Jews to be exterminated, then that would have made the Holocaust a morally good and righteous thing?
Post by
blademeld
Morally, no, ethically, yes.
Post Reply
You are not logged in. Please
log in
to post a reply or
register
if you don't already have an account.
© 2021 Fanbyte
