[_ Old Earth _] If Evolution were true...

[John]

If evolution were true how does anyone tell right form wrong.

If i asked you to make a list of ten things you find wrong, before you put anything on the list i want to know how are you deciding, are you deciding right from wrong based on what Osama Bin Laden would think , do we decide right from wrong based on what the government thinks ?, do we decide right from wrong based on the majority ?.... How do we decide right from wrong? i have never had an answer to this.

 

[Ignatz]

If evolution were true how does anyone tell right form wrong.

If i asked you to make a list of ten things you find wrong, before you put anything on the list i want to know how are you deciding, are you deciding right from wrong based on what Osama Bin Laden would think , do we decide right from wrong based on what the government thinks ?, do we decide right from wrong based on the majority ?.... How do we decide right from wrong? i have never had an answer to this.

My sense of right and wrong is the result of my upbringing, the cultural norms of my society and the natural instinct all humans share to try to get along and generally be helpful when the need arises.

We are social creatures, and have developed tools to help us exist more or less peacefully with our groups. When tensions run hot, this releases stress hormones in both sexes, making for an unpleasant experience; there is a natural inclination to want things to settle down and return to a peaceful state. As infants, we learn that injuring others, physically or otherwise, can often back-fire and and result in unpleasant consequences, physically, socially or otherwise. We have a natural instinct to "get along", it is as innate as our desire to drink when we are thirsty, eat when we are hungry, seek comfort and reassurance when we are frightened or lonely.

The reason I don't kill people is not because I fear punishment from an omnipotent God, but that I have no DESIRE to actually kill anybody, and I would be leery of anyone who said that the only reason they don't go on a killing spree is because they fear for their after-life.

There is a survival advantage to humans having a social sense and an innate moral sense. On our own, in the wild, we would likely not survive long, but in groups, we have mutual protection. We can hunt, farm, raise children, even have free-time, etc.

In short, I suppose I decide what is right or wrong by considering wether what I do is something that I would take offense at if others were to do them.

Here's a question for you. Come up with a moral statement made, or a moral action performed by a believer or a person of faith, that could not have been uttered by an unbeliever. (I love my neighbor, I help the poor, etc. These are obviously not true examples but go ahead and try to think of one)

 

[Deep Thought]

John, I assume you derive your morality and sense of right and wrong from the Bible?

 

[John]

If evolution were true how does anyone tell right form wrong.

If i asked you to make a list of ten things you find wrong, before you put anything on the list i want to know how are you deciding, are you deciding right from wrong based on what Osama Bin Laden would think , do we decide right from wrong based on what the government thinks ?, do we decide right from wrong based on the majority ?.... How do we decide right from wrong? i have never had an answer to this.

My sense of right and wrong is the result of my upbringing, the cultural norms of my society and the natural instinct all humans share to try to get along and generally be helpful when the need arises.

We are social creatures, and have developed tools to help us exist more or less peacefully with our groups. When tensions run hot, this releases stress hormones in both sexes, making for an unpleasant experience; there is a natural inclination to want things to settle down and return to a peaceful state. As infants, we learn that injuring others, physically or otherwise, can often back-fire and and result in unpleasant consequences, physically, socially or otherwise. We have a natural instinct to "get along", it is as innate as our desire to drink when we are thirsty, eat when we are hungry, seek comfort and reassurance when we are frightened or lonely.

The reason I don't kill people is not because I fear punishment from an omnipotent God, but that I have no DESIRE to actually kill anybody, and I would be leery of anyone who said that the only reason they don't go on a killing spree is because they fear for their after-life.

There is a survival advantage to humans having a social sense and an innate moral sense. On our own, in the wild, we would likely not survive long, but in groups, we have mutual protection. We can hunt, farm, raise children, even have free-time, etc.

In short, I suppose I decide what is right or wrong by considering wether what I do is something that I would take offense at if others were to do them.

Here's a question for you. Come up with a moral statement made, or a moral action performed by a believer or a person of faith, that could not have been uttered by an unbeliever. (I love my neighbor, I help the poor, etc. These are obviously not true examples but go ahead and try to think of one)

No doubt that ill question was from Christopher Hitchens, In short i can't think of any action or statement, but the believer has it over the non believer in the end.

The sense of right and wrong comes from God, if evolution is true then nothing is right or wrong, i can kill billions it wont matter, thats why athiestism is so popular these days, because it allows crap to weave its way in to peopels lives, homosexuality, beastilty, murder, rape, theft, lies, really every sin, it does not matter, now of course there are laws put in place by man, many see that as the only punishment. but does it matter ?

 

[jwu]

The sense of right and wrong comes from God, if evolution is true then nothing is right or wrong, i can kill billions it wont matter, thats why athiestism is so popular these days, because it allows crap to weave its way in to peopels lives, homosexuality, beastilty, murder, rape, theft, lies, really every sin, it does not matter, now of course there are laws put in place by man, many see that as the only punishment. but does it matter ?

Evolution does not equal atheism. You're argueing against the latter, in a pure "religion makes me feel warm and fuzzy, therefore it has to be right" way.

Actually, if there were no God and no afterlife, then i'd consider murder to be much more severe than with a God and an afterlife.
Without God/afterlife, one really takes away a person's life and wastes the own in prison.

With God/afterlife, this is just a minor annoyance and fades in relevance in comparison to the eternal afterlife. Keep in mind, murderers only need to repent and then happily end up in heaven as well.

Isn't it interesting that atheists are underrepresented in the prison population?

 

[Ignatz]

If evolution were true how does anyone tell right form wrong.

If i asked you to make a list of ten things you find wrong, before you put anything on the list i want to know how are you deciding, are you deciding right from wrong based on what Osama Bin Laden would think , do we decide right from wrong based on what the government thinks ?, do we decide right from wrong based on the majority ?.... How do we decide right from wrong? i have never had an answer to this.

My sense of right and wrong is the result of my upbringing, the cultural norms of my society and the natural instinct all humans share to try to get along and generally be helpful when the need arises.

We are social creatures, and have developed tools to help us exist more or less peacefully with our groups. When tensions run hot, this releases stress hormones in both sexes, making for an unpleasant experience; there is a natural inclination to want things to settle down and return to a peaceful state. As infants, we learn that injuring others, physically or otherwise, can often back-fire and and result in unpleasant consequences, physically, socially or otherwise. We have a natural instinct to "get along", it is as innate as our desire to drink when we are thirsty, eat when we are hungry, seek comfort and reassurance when we are frightened or lonely.

The reason I don't kill people is not because I fear punishment from an omnipotent God, but that I have no DESIRE to actually kill anybody, and I would be leery of anyone who said that the only reason they don't go on a killing spree is because they fear for their after-life.

There is a survival advantage to humans having a social sense and an innate moral sense. On our own, in the wild, we would likely not survive long, but in groups, we have mutual protection. We can hunt, farm, raise children, even have free-time, etc.

In short, I suppose I decide what is right or wrong by considering wether what I do is something that I would take offense at if others were to do them.

Here's a question for you. Come up with a moral statement made, or a moral action performed by a believer or a person of faith, that could not have been uttered by an unbeliever. (I love my neighbor, I help the poor, etc. These are obviously not true examples but go ahead and try to think of one)

No doubt that ill question was from Christopher Hitchens, In short i can't think of any action or statement, but the believer has it over the non believer in the end.

The sense of right and wrong comes from God, if evolution is true then nothing is right or wrong, i can kill billions it wont matter, thats why athiestism is so popular these days, because it allows crap to weave its way in to peopels lives, homosexuality, beastilty, murder, rape, theft, lies, really every sin, it does not matter, now of course there are laws put in place by man, many see that as the only punishment. but does it matter ?

Yes, that was a quote from Christopher Hitchens. Every religious person should be made aware of it. There is a reason it cannot be answered.

Are you suggesting that simply because you won't be "punished" in an after-life that killing "billions" of people is somehow okay or moral? There are laws and morality and codes of conduct that are far older than christianity. Did you think that people were just going around killing each other indiscriminately before Moses came down from mount Sinai? All around the world it is agreed that there should be punishment for murderers. Nobody can agree on a religion, but they can agree on that. No god is required to believe this.

Take another look at the Hitchens quote above. There's a reason I mention it.

Morals don't need to come from a god, they come from our own groups and societies, and from our innate sense of Basic fairness. Even children have this sense, and will complain of any perceived injustice.

Murder is immoral because, as a species, we have decided that we don't want to be murdered. Or raped, or lied to, or robbed, or anything else you can think of deemed to be immoral. The God of the Bible CLEARLY expects us to have slaves, for example. How did we come to the conclusion that slavery was wrong? Did God change his mind? Are we immoral for NOT having slaves, or not stoning our wife to death is she is not a virgin on our wedding night, or any other immoral act that is only committed for religious reasons?

Too much skeptical inquiry is not the problem here. All these things result in human suffering, and since humans do not enjoy suffering, we have deemed these things "wrong".

 

[Heidi]

If evolution were true how does anyone tell right form wrong.

If i asked you to make a list of ten things you find wrong, before you put anything on the list i want to know how are you deciding, are you deciding right from wrong based on what Osama Bin Laden would think , do we decide right from wrong based on what the government thinks ?, do we decide right from wrong based on the majority ?.... How do we decide right from wrong? i have never had an answer to this.

My sense of right and wrong is the result of my upbringing, the cultural norms of my society and the natural instinct all humans share to try to get along and generally be helpful when the need arises.

We are social creatures, and have developed tools to help us exist more or less peacefully with our groups. When tensions run hot, this releases stress hormones in both sexes, making for an unpleasant experience; there is a natural inclination to want things to settle down and return to a peaceful state. As infants, we learn that injuring others, physically or otherwise, can often back-fire and and result in unpleasant consequences, physically, socially or otherwise. We have a natural instinct to "get along", it is as innate as our desire to drink when we are thirsty, eat when we are hungry, seek comfort and reassurance when we are frightened or lonely.

The reason I don't kill people is not because I fear punishment from an omnipotent God, but that I have no DESIRE to actually kill anybody, and I would be leery of anyone who said that the only reason they don't go on a killing spree is because they fear for their after-life.

There is a survival advantage to humans having a social sense and an innate moral sense. On our own, in the wild, we would likely not survive long, but in groups, we have mutual protection. We can hunt, farm, raise children, even have free-time, etc.

In short, I suppose I decide what is right or wrong by considering wether what I do is something that I would take offense at if others were to do them.

Here's a question for you. Come up with a moral statement made, or a moral action performed by a believer or a person of faith, that could not have been uttered by an unbeliever. (I love my neighbor, I help the poor, etc. These are obviously not true examples but go ahead and try to think of one)

The sense of right and wrong of the Germans during WWII came from their culture and society as well. ;-)

Human beings can rationalize anything they want including; abortion, homosexual marriages, racism and even murder, especially if the majority of people in their society or culture endorse it. So sorry friend, but humans aren't honest and moral enough to discern between right and wrong even though they boast that they are. :

 

[Jayls5]

If evolution were true how does anyone tell right form wrong.

If i asked you to make a list of ten things you find wrong, before you put anything on the list i want to know how are you deciding, are you deciding right from wrong based on what Osama Bin Laden would think , do we decide right from wrong based on what the government thinks ?, do we decide right from wrong based on the majority ?.... How do we decide right from wrong? i have never had an answer to this.

My sense of right and wrong is the result of my upbringing, the cultural norms of my society and the natural instinct all humans share to try to get along and generally be helpful when the need arises.

We are social creatures, and have developed tools to help us exist more or less peacefully with our groups. When tensions run hot, this releases stress hormones in both sexes, making for an unpleasant experience; there is a natural inclination to want things to settle down and return to a peaceful state. As infants, we learn that injuring others, physically or otherwise, can often back-fire and and result in unpleasant consequences, physically, socially or otherwise. We have a natural instinct to "get along", it is as innate as our desire to drink when we are thirsty, eat when we are hungry, seek comfort and reassurance when we are frightened or lonely.

The reason I don't kill people is not because I fear punishment from an omnipotent God, but that I have no DESIRE to actually kill anybody, and I would be leery of anyone who said that the only reason they don't go on a killing spree is because they fear for their after-life.

There is a survival advantage to humans having a social sense and an innate moral sense. On our own, in the wild, we would likely not survive long, but in groups, we have mutual protection. We can hunt, farm, raise children, even have free-time, etc.

In short, I suppose I decide what is right or wrong by considering wether what I do is something that I would take offense at if others were to do them.

Here's a question for you. Come up with a moral statement made, or a moral action performed by a believer or a person of faith, that could not have been uttered by an unbeliever. (I love my neighbor, I help the poor, etc. These are obviously not true examples but go ahead and try to think of one)

The sense of right and wrong of the Germans during WWII came from their culture and society as well. ;-)

Human beings can rationalize anything they want including; abortion, homosexual marriages, racism and even murder, especially if the majority of people in their society or culture endorse it. So sorry friend, but humans aren't honest and moral enough to discern between right and wrong even though they boast that they are. :

People kill in the name of religion all of the time as well. We see people of every genre of beliefs doing stupid things by our standards. What you're implying is that somehow humans can't make effective societies without arbitrary rules set forth by a a book supposedly coming from God. This is completely unsubstantiated, which is not surprising given its source.

 

[Drew]

If evolution were true how does anyone tell right form wrong.

If i asked you to make a list of ten things you find wrong, before you put anything on the list i want to know how are you deciding, are you deciding right from wrong based on what Osama Bin Laden would think , do we decide right from wrong based on what the government thinks ?, do we decide right from wrong based on the majority ?.... How do we decide right from wrong? i have never had an answer to this.

Let's suppose for the sake of argument that human life has evolved in an entirely non-theistic manner - there is either no God or God does not choose to influence things here on Earth. I believe neither of these positions myself, but let's suppose they are true.

Human society will almost certainly come up with "principles of human behaviour" that tend to make society stable and prosperous. In any system of agents operating in a constrained environment, there are going to be ways of acting that cause disorder, suffering, and chaos as well as ways of acting that promote peace, prosperity, and happiness.

Can these "good ways of acting" be considered to be an "absolute moral code". In a sense they can - they are true properties of that system. So even, under a "no-God, we got here by the blind forces of nature" worldview, humans would develop "moral" codes to guide their behaviour. There would not be moral chaos or anarchy.

This is not to say more than I am actually saying. I believe that God exist, He does guide this world, and we do well to follow his "rules for living". But we should not unfairly characterize the atheist as having no "grounding" for morals. Moral codes would indeed arise even in the absence of God, assuming some basic things such as universal (or nearly universal) desire for prosperity, peace, happiness, comfort, etc.

 

[John]

I am just saying if god was out of the picture there is no such thing as right and wrong, no matter what social creatures believe to be right and wrong.

 

[jwu]

I am just saying if god was out of the picture there is no such thing as right and wrong, no matter what social creatures believe to be right and wrong.

Why isn't an overwhelming majority vote that "it is bad to murder people" sufficient to determine that murder is wrong?

How about the "Golden Rule"? (Treat others like you want to be treated)

 

[John]

The golden rule means nothing if evolution were true.

Just because a bunch of people who "evolved" say that something is wrong or right, what makes them...right ?

If evolution is true it does not matter, i can kill you or you can kill me, it makes no difference, i will just die and cease to exist. Morality is just a human induced thought pattern of what appeals to him/her if evolution were true, but i know better, god made us and gave us an inert knowledge of right and wrong, if you fell that lying is wrong that though is because of god maybe not directly, because people have believed in god for many a years the standard for morality has been passed down, if there were no god to begin with there would be no morals.

 

[Orion]

Murder is immoral because, as a species, we have decided that we don't want to be murdered. Or raped, or lied to, or robbed, or anything else you can think of deemed to be immoral. The God of the Bible CLEARLY expects us to have slaves, for example. How did we come to the conclusion that slavery was wrong? Did God change his mind? Are we immoral for NOT having slaves, or not stoning our wife to death is she is not a virgin on our wedding night, or any other immoral act that is only committed for religious reasons?

Too much skeptical inquiry is not the problem here. All these things result in human suffering, and since humans do not enjoy suffering, we have deemed these things "wrong".

This is very true. And these types of laws existed probably before written language, but definitely before Old Testiment texts. It is called, developing into a society where antisocial behavior hurts the entire group, so you set up consequences against such actions.

But also, as Ignatz pointed out, we have laws against a lot of things that were permitted and even decreed in the texts known now as the Old Testiment. :-?

 

[jwu]

The golden rule means nothing if evolution were true.

Just because a bunch of people who "evolved" say that something is wrong or right, what makes them...right ?

It's axiomatic.

If evolution is true it does not matter, i can kill you or you can kill me, it makes no difference, i will just die and cease to exist.

God and evolution are not mutually exclusive.

However, in a theistic scenario the difference is even less, isn't it? One doesn't actually even die, but continues to live in the afterlife.

Besides, do i need to point out that "theist must be right beause it makes me feel warm and fuzzy and special" is fallacious?

Morality is just a human induced thought pattern of what appeals to him/her if evolution were true, but i know better, god made us and gave us an inert knowledge of right and wrong, if you fell that lying is wrong that though is because of god maybe not directly, because people have believed in god for many a years the standard for morality has been passed down, if there were no god to begin with there would be no morals.

As it has been pointed out before...where do moral codes which are not part of the Bible come from then? They should not exist at all, if your line of reasoning were correct.

 

[John]

It seem that your dodging the question. I'll say again If evolution is true there is no right and wrong, you can't wiggle out of it.

 

[Ignatz]

If evolution were true how does anyone tell right form wrong.

If i asked you to make a list of ten things you find wrong, before you put anything on the list i want to know how are you deciding, are you deciding right from wrong based on what Osama Bin Laden would think , do we decide right from wrong based on what the government thinks ?, do we decide right from wrong based on the majority ?.... How do we decide right from wrong? i have never had an answer to this.

My sense of right and wrong is the result of my upbringing, the cultural norms of my society and the natural instinct all humans share to try to get along and generally be helpful when the need arises.

We are social creatures, and have developed tools to help us exist more or less peacefully with our groups. When tensions run hot, this releases stress hormones in both sexes, making for an unpleasant experience; there is a natural inclination to want things to settle down and return to a peaceful state. As infants, we learn that injuring others, physically or otherwise, can often back-fire and and result in unpleasant consequences, physically, socially or otherwise. We have a natural instinct to "get along", it is as innate as our desire to drink when we are thirsty, eat when we are hungry, seek comfort and reassurance when we are frightened or lonely.

The reason I don't kill people is not because I fear punishment from an omnipotent God, but that I have no DESIRE to actually kill anybody, and I would be leery of anyone who said that the only reason they don't go on a killing spree is because they fear for their after-life.

There is a survival advantage to humans having a social sense and an innate moral sense. On our own, in the wild, we would likely not survive long, but in groups, we have mutual protection. We can hunt, farm, raise children, even have free-time, etc.

In short, I suppose I decide what is right or wrong by considering wether what I do is something that I would take offense at if others were to do them.

Here's a question for you. Come up with a moral statement made, or a moral action performed by a believer or a person of faith, that could not have been uttered by an unbeliever. (I love my neighbor, I help the poor, etc. These are obviously not true examples but go ahead and try to think of one)

The sense of right and wrong of the Germans during WWII came from their culture and society as well. ;-)

Human beings can rationalize anything they want including; abortion, homosexual marriages, racism and even murder, especially if the majority of people in their society or culture endorse it. So sorry friend, but humans aren't honest and moral enough to discern between right and wrong even though they boast that they are. :

Nazis are a great example. Hitler was catholic and actually combined the church and the state when he rose to power. Prayer even became mandatory in schools under the Nazi regime.

While Hitler was in prison, before he came to power, he wrote his book "Mein Kampf." He writes: "... I am convinced that I am acting as the agent of our Creator. By fighting off the Jews. I am doing the Lord's work." Years later, when in power, he quoted those same words in a Reichstag speech in 1938.

Years later he writes to General Gerhart Engel: "I am now as before a Catholic and will always remain so." He never left the church, and the church never left or denounced him. Popes even granted Hitler, Franco and mussolini veto power over who would be appointed bishop in Spain, Italy and Germany. Great Books were banned by his church, but his miserable Mien Kampf never appeared on the Index of Forbidden Books. Soldiers of the nazi wermacht wore belt buckles inscribed with: "Gott mit uns" (God is with us). The troops were often sprinkled with holy water by the priests. It was a real Christian country whose citizens were indoctrinated by BOTH the state and the church to blindly follow all authority figures, political and religious.

Pol Pot and Stalin are other examples people like to use. Stalin and Pol Pot were atheists, but The problem with Hitler and the nazis, or pol pot's regime, or Stalinism is not that these movements had no religion, it's that they are too much LIKE religion; they are utterly DOGMATIC belief systems, demanding unquestioning obedience and faith. The limited, temporary success of these movements was due to their leaders tendency to exterminate anyone who got in their way.

Again, Too much Reason and skeptical inquiry is not the problem here.

Was it a moral act for the early Jews to slaughter the canaanites? or christians to use the bible to justify slavery for hundreds of years? or muslims to slay the infidel?

People in ALL of these religions have read their holy books, and they actually found justification for these atrocities, including the murder of children, genocide, etc.

The evolutionist can find NO justification for slavery, or racism, or the subordination of women, for example. One needs to have unquestioning, dogmatic faith to "rationalize" that these things could ever be seen as "moral".

If your statements are true how do you explain that most racists, and murderers, for example, are people of faith?

How do you explain that there are evolutionists who believe that murder is immoral?

 

[Ignatz]

It seem that your dodging the question. I'll say again If evolution is true there is no right and wrong, you can't wiggle out of it.

Developing a sense of right and wrong is necessary for an intelligent, social species like ours to survive and not destroy itself.

Consensus that "murder/stealing/rape/genocide/etc. is wrong" is necessary for social cohesion and our survival. Evolutionary theory absolutely allows for this.

There are plenty of examples of immoral behavior deemed to be moral by holy books, but unsupported by reason and ToE. My example of stoning your wife if she is not a virgin on her wedding day, or killing someone who you find worshipping a different god, then killing everyone in his village are examples of horrible, immoral acts that ONLY existed SOLELY BECAUSE of what we tell ourselves about God.

It is impossible to justify these atrocities with evolutionary theory.

Some moral truths are impossible to justify by invoking our holy books, such as the abolition of slavery, or women's liberation.

Wherever our morals come from, they most certainly do not come from ancient dogmatic texts.
Our moral sense existed long before the 10 commandments, before any holy books were written.

 

[Deep Thought]

The sense of right and wrong comes from God,

And you obviously see the Bible as the word of God. If that's the case, then why don't you obey *all* of the ten commandments?

 

[Ignatz]

It seem that your dodging the question. I'll say again If evolution is true there is no right and wrong, you can't wiggle out of it.

One last thing,
Speaking of "dodging questions"...

Can you explain, in your own words, what the role of mutation and natural selection is in our current understanding of the ToE?

I don't know why you keep dodging this simple request. :smt021

But you can't wiggle out of it.