love and heretics

It's better to light a candle than curse the darkness

“Morality does not exist in an atheist’s or evolutionist’s worldview.”

“For morality to exist there has to be a Morality-Giver. Atheists do not recognize a Morality-Giver therefore morality does not exist in an atheistic society; and is inconsistent with an atheist’s worldview.”

A response to the above…

“You are correct when you say morality does not exist. It is not a “thing” that is given by anyone.
in fact…
If we were to “TAKE THE UNIVERSE AND GRIND IT DOWN TO THE FINEST POWDER AND SIEVE IT THROUGH THE FINEST SIEVE” we could not show “ONE atom of justice, one molecule of mercy,’ ….. or even ONE element of morality…

And yet you ” ACT AS IF THERE IS SOME IDEAL ORDER IN THE WORLD, AS IF THERE IS SOME…SOME RIGHTNESS IN THE UNIVERSE BY WHICH IT MAY BE JUDGED.”~The Hogfather (Terry Pratchett)

To the atheist, and the (non-theist evolutionist) We would agree. We recognize that such things are ideas …because we make them so.
That is why the ideas themselves,our very understanding of them… (justice/mercy/morality) continue to evolve.

We observe our actions, and how they affect each other.

We observe that we are not islands unto ourselves.

We learn of empathy and compassion , justice and morality, and begin to understand the effects of our actions, and things like cooperation and reciprocity through experience, and when taught about it from others who have experienced it…

So I in fact agree with you that such things (in the manner that you proclaim) do not exist, but I will take it one step further, the non existence of such things, is proof that there is NOT a morality-giver.

Advertisements

4 Comments

  1. There is Manchester United, thus this is proof positive of no Morality-Giver.

    Pratchett once said in an interview when asked about something to do with religion ) can’t remember the exact question) that what Paul really needed was a good woman! (paraphrase)

  2. Great book, great writer.

  3. rautakyy

    Is it even “morality”, if one is just obeying authoritarian rules from a “law-giver” in hope of personal reward or punishment, and not deciding to do the right thing, because one understands why it is the right thing? It sounds much more like moralistic authoritarianism. Morality requires understanding the consequenses of actions.

  4. Argus

    I think—having read the opening para—that it all depends on viewpoint …

Your respectful comments are appreciated

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: