I once had a long conversation with a religious relative, and I think it boils down to her not believing that someone can be "moral" without believing that god is watching.
Somewhat relevant:
Why Did God Create Atheists?
There is a famous story told in Chassidic literature that addresses this very question. The Master teaches the student that God created everything in the world to be appreciated, since everything is here to teach us a lesson.
One clever student asks “What lesson can we learn from atheists? Why did God create them?”
The Master responds “God created atheists to teach us the most important lesson of them all — the lesson of true compassion. You see, when an atheist performs an act of charity, visits someone who is sick, helps someone in need, and cares for the world, he is not doing so because of some religious teaching. He does not believe that God commanded him to perform this act. In fact, he does not believe in God at all, so his acts are based on an inner sense of morality. And look at the kindness he can bestow upon others simply because he feels it to be right.”
“This means,” the Master continued “that when someone reaches out to you for help, you should never say ‘I pray that God will help you.’ Instead for the moment, you should become an atheist, imagine that there is no God who can help, and say ‘I will help you.’”
—Martin Buber, Tales of Hasidim Vol. 2 (1991)
Mildly hilarious how Japan is a ridiculously safe place crime-wise and has pretty high moral standards and is pretty much entirely atheist. They visit temples because they visit temples and it's just expected that that's what you do because everyone does it ala being Japanese circular logic. The same circular logic is responsible for their moral standards.
Turns out it's not God thats responsible for morality, it's the existence and enforcement of norms by members of the community that is.
Well.... that depends on your morals, Japanese pop culture still sexualizes young girls... and the trains have dedicated "female cars" so woman can avoid groping in the regular cars. Women are distinctly in a lower class than men.
Japan is a very clean and safe country, but I wouldn't hold it up as a beacon of morality.
And Americas full of drug addicts, school shootings and cops killing black teenagers. And that's despite all those Christians, their morals and their prayers.
And as it turns out women and black people were distinctly lower class than men until a few decades ago. Religion didn't change in that time. But the social norms that various communities enforce on each other did.
And that's my whole point. Religion has nothing to do with it. It's the same dynamics that exist in every group that are what cause the phenomenon of people behaving themselves according to a set of rules.
My one and only point with my example was not the absolute morality of one place vs another but the fact that a place basically devoid of all religious belief doesn't automatically devolve into debauchery, chaos and total amorality. They seem to think that's what will happen. It doesn't but that doesn't stop them believing that.
People arguing the point completely miss the fact that humans don't care at all what's true. They care who's side your on and that's all they try to figure out.
On morality and atheism, I'm reminded of this dialogue from the show "True Detective", Season 1 Episode 3 (emphasized part of it) [1]:
Rust Cohle: "If the only thing keeping a person decent is the expectation of divine reward, then brother that person is a piece of shit. And I’d like to get as many of them out in the open as possible. You gotta get together and tell yourself stories that violate every law of the universe just to get through the goddamn day? What’s that say about your reality?""
i'd like to upvote you about twenty more times, because you correctly nailed down:
1) The disconnect between American Christians and Atheists
2) How (many) atheists approach moral relativism
3) How (in my atheist mind) Christians should approach the world, akin to the way Jesus did.
This story is good. The people should learn such thing. My opinion is to learn all of the religion, rather than just one or two. That way, you can learn more. (Of course, religion is not the only thing to learn, but here it is only mention the religion.)
Also, there are good people, and also bad people, and also good+bad people, and also bad+good people, and also other people, regardless of your religion (or if you are atheist). Religion isn't bad, but some people use religion to do bad thing (although people who are not religious will also do bad thing), and also, churches, like other organizations, can be corrupted, but it can also be changed over time.
And then, there is the case that some things can be unclear what is best and what is not good (and sometimes what is good for something is otherwise no good, making it more complicated), and that sometimes is consider based on circumstances which is not in effect, which can sometimes makes it wrong instead of good. (Different philosophers also have different ideas how to do morals/ethics. My own idea does not quite match the stuff I read elsewhere, but I think it is not necessary for me to elaborate on that right here at this time.)
This passage and the article really spoke to me. I was raised in a strongly Catholic family in the US. I have since apostized from the Catholic church, but I still exist in that community. I know many people who are good solely because of their faith and that scares me. I am uncomfortable with individuals who offshore morality.
Okay, this was rambly, but my point is agree with your post, and I feel the effects of cultural Christianity in the US.
I grew up in a Christian family, went to church and/or bible school every Sunday, but was never taught that atheism is dangerous. I was taught though that atheists are going to hell and that I should try to help them to come to believe in god, but I wasn't taught to fear them or feel that their belief is dangerous.
I don't even know what that means. My family went to 3 different churches while I was growing up, changes were all due to moves but we stuck with one church once we were in an area. I don't know how they chose a church, friends/family/coworkers, I suppose.
Apologetics is a field of Christian discourse involving reactions to and study of cultural, intellectual and scientific movements from the Christian perspective.
Hopping around to different churches is an interesting experience many don't have, so I'd encourage it, especially if you attend more days than Sunday (the most boring day to go), and especially if your family has been deciding what church you attend your whole life.
> and I think it boils down to her not believing that someone can be "moral"
its interesting to note, that the concept of morality, is in fact, moored as a consensual hallucination as to what is good.
therefore, as an atheist, you might mimic a "cultural" sense of goodness; but since the intent is not from the same source -- you may not pretend to share it. Logically, you are immoral simply because you do not share the same inspiration. This is a direct consequence of "assuredness".
if you want it in mathematical format ;)
you have to look deeper than the act. Which is what, you are missing. It is not enough to be 'good' (as if some objective standard can be said to exist!); it is also important to be able to enunciate the impulse to 'goodness'; and further to assure the reliability of that impulse.
This is why atheism, is and always will be, a minority religion. You lack the one characteristic, that all other religions share. A framework.
That is not to say, btw, that organized religion is "better". As with everything, the intent and education/erudition of the practitioner, makes the difference in real effect.
> so his acts are based on an inner sense of morality.
> its interesting to note, that the concept of morality, is in fact, moored as a consensual hallucination as to what is good.
Says who? You?
> therefore, as an atheist, you might mimic a "cultural" sense of goodness; but since the intent is not from the same source -- you may not pretend to share it. Logically, you are immoral simply because you do not share the same inspiration. This is a direct consequence of "assuredness".
if you want it in mathematical format ;)
Again, your entire argument here is hinged on the assumption that all morality originates from religion and everyone else is just faking it. What you believe is right and everyone else is, by definition, wrong. Give me a break with this "mathematical format" nonsense and condescending smiley faces.
Yup. Your idea of good, is not my idea of good. That we can reach an agreement (compromise), the consensual portion.
That good, is often a matter of perspective, and subject to change in hindsight (i.e. a value judgement distorted heavily by the sensorium/ego) is where it is a hallucination.
> Again, your entire argument here is hinged on the assumption that all morality originates from religion
no, it doesn't. in point of fact, religion arises as a consequence, of the argument. So do gangs/police/armies/nations. Welcome to the morass, of humanity. :)
;)
or if you prefer "the road to hell, is paved with "good" intentions".
or more succinctly, "hell is other people".
> Give me a break with this "mathematical format" nonsense
Not a fan of logic?
> and condescending smiley faces.
condescending? not really. simply commenting on an alternate pathway to arrive at the conclusion, as a consequence rather than a posit. as I am not privy to your actual conversation with said "religious" person, I chose to demonstrate the line of reasoning.
But by all means, continue to stick your head up your ass and think its "religion is the only source of goodness" statement, rather than a logical argument, predicated on human psychology and its biases.
Somewhat relevant:
Why Did God Create Atheists?
There is a famous story told in Chassidic literature that addresses this very question. The Master teaches the student that God created everything in the world to be appreciated, since everything is here to teach us a lesson. One clever student asks “What lesson can we learn from atheists? Why did God create them?”
The Master responds “God created atheists to teach us the most important lesson of them all — the lesson of true compassion. You see, when an atheist performs an act of charity, visits someone who is sick, helps someone in need, and cares for the world, he is not doing so because of some religious teaching. He does not believe that God commanded him to perform this act. In fact, he does not believe in God at all, so his acts are based on an inner sense of morality. And look at the kindness he can bestow upon others simply because he feels it to be right.” “This means,” the Master continued “that when someone reaches out to you for help, you should never say ‘I pray that God will help you.’ Instead for the moment, you should become an atheist, imagine that there is no God who can help, and say ‘I will help you.’” —Martin Buber, Tales of Hasidim Vol. 2 (1991)
https://randysrandom.com/god-create-atheists/