Morality without God? Thread - Christians of Moddb

So this interesting debate occurred in the debating society and many fascinating points were raised that I myself wish to discuss.

We obviously know it's possible to be "good without God" but when talking about "morality" this is subjective to everyone. Take abortion for example, it's widely debated upon by everyone, religious people included who each have an individual opinion on when it's morally right (if at all).

But I think one of the more interesting points raised in the debate was that in some societies, even today, there are bad acts we consider morally wrong but aren't considered morally wrong there.

The argument in the image could easily be applied to subjective morality. "I think hitting kids is okay if you're their parents and if it's to discipline them, see? I just said it's okay and in my society it is. Any who question go to prison. That's how it works." So I think subjective morality isn't real morality, it is divisive probably causing more hostility in human history than anything else (ironically something that those opposed to religion overlook) and this human morality is shown to be ever changing with the times.

True morality should be constant, never changing. It is something that must be a real thing and comes from God. Moral realism does exist, the arguments for its existence as are follows:

1. Nearly universally across human cultures, there exist the same basic standards of morality. In addition, there exist in all cultures truly altruistic acts which lead to no genetic benefit.
2. The majority of people who explicitly deny the existence of objective morality still act as if objective morality exists.
3. There exists a nearly universal human intuition that certain things are objectively right or wrong.
4. The majority of philosophers recognize the existence of objective moral facts.
5. Many naturalists (like Sam Harris or Shelley Kagan) affirm the existence of objective moral facts, despite the problems inherent in grounding these facts in the natural world.

Whilst there have been societies that have rejected objective morality from time to time (see Nazi state), overall common moral values seem universal. Naturalism cannot explain this. Without God, this morality shouldn't exist.

Edited by: KnightofEquulei

Yeah, I remember that discussion on the debating society.

I'll be frank, I think many people out there are too lacking in insight to understand just how Religion and God has affected morality across cultures in history. They either lack the will and cognitive ability to realize it for themselves, or they simply stay in denial of it to further advance their own points and political agenda. Secularism is very prevalent in politics, especially in western culture these days. So that's one reason. I haven't seen much hope in the East either.

I'm not trying to insult people's intelligence, but there's a reason there are men like Plato and Archimedes, and then those who can only try to follow in their footsteps. One really has to delve into these subjects with a open mind and think for themselves cognitively. Otherwise it's wasted knowledge on a unwilling mind. But even if you aren't that bright compared to others, one can still learn these things on their own if they simply sought teaching out faithfully.

What I'm trying to say I guess, is that the Philosophical and Doctrinal type are the one's with much greater understanding of these subjects. As for those who aren't that type, they can still learn it. But have to have it taught to them instead of learning it for themselves, they have to seek out teaching. Hence why we need teachers with insight so much. Even Christ's Disciples were perplexed by things He taught them, until He revealed the meaning to them.

There are leaders and there are followers. Don't get so upset with the followers, they are only relating what they know and have been taught.

Edited by: Mike Pence