Many believers make the argument that morality would not exist if there wasn't for God (which implies that god must be real); this argument is very poor for many reasons.
For the sake of argument, let's say that God exist ('for the sake of argument' =/= concession that a god exists). Is it good to act morally only because someone is watching? If God is the reason we act morally, then it would seem that without God everyone would act immorally. This sort of mentality is why believers perceive atheists as being immoral, and completely goes against the concept of free-will. On the other hand believers see atheists arguing for moral-relativism, and view them as being moral-less blah blah, so on and so forth.
I would argue that those that are moral because of God are like those little-asshole-kids that are only good around Christmas an their birthday for the reward.
The religious are unable to escape their selfish motives for behaving well. Someone that behaves well only out of fear of punishment or hope of reward, is not moral. I would argue that by default atheists are more genuine because they don't believe someone is watching them like Big Brother, and don't believe in reward post-life.
Someone that behaves morally for the sake of others is genuinely behaving morally; i.e. motives are not out of self-interest, but out the interest of others. It seems that those who subscribe to the 'I'm only good because someone watching' view of morality are sociopaths, but what do you think?
Do believers have a sociopathic-view of morality?
Click the 'agree' button if you agree, or 'disagree' button if you don't agree (buttons are below the post).
For the sake of argument, let's say that God exist ('for the sake of argument' =/= concession that a god exists). Is it good to act morally only because someone is watching? If God is the reason we act morally, then it would seem that without God everyone would act immorally. This sort of mentality is why believers perceive atheists as being immoral, and completely goes against the concept of free-will. On the other hand believers see atheists arguing for moral-relativism, and view them as being moral-less blah blah, so on and so forth.
I would argue that those that are moral because of God are like those little-asshole-kids that are only good around Christmas an their birthday for the reward.
The religious are unable to escape their selfish motives for behaving well. Someone that behaves well only out of fear of punishment or hope of reward, is not moral. I would argue that by default atheists are more genuine because they don't believe someone is watching them like Big Brother, and don't believe in reward post-life.
Someone that behaves morally for the sake of others is genuinely behaving morally; i.e. motives are not out of self-interest, but out the interest of others. It seems that those who subscribe to the 'I'm only good because someone watching' view of morality are sociopaths, but what do you think?
Do believers have a sociopathic-view of morality?
Click the 'agree' button if you agree, or 'disagree' button if you don't agree (buttons are below the post).
No comments:
Post a Comment