Announcement

Collapse

Apologetics 301 Guidelines

If you think this is the area where you tell everyone you are sorry for eating their lunch out of the fridge, it probably isn't the place for you


This forum is open discussion between atheists and all theists to defend and debate their views on religion or non-religion. Please respect that this is a Christian-owned forum and refrain from gratuitous blasphemy. VERY wide leeway is given in range of expression and allowable behavior as compared to other areas of the forum, and moderation is not overly involved unless necessary. Please keep this in mind. Atheists who wish to interact with theists in a way that does not seek to undermine theistic faith may participate in the World Religions Department. Non-debate question and answers and mild and less confrontational discussions can take place in General Theistics.


Forum Rules: Here
See more
See less

Absurdity of Morality Apart From God

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #61
    Originally posted by Tassman View Post
    Well, the US’s “cultural religiosity” has nevertheless resulted in gross social inequities, gun-violence and high incarceration rates. This as opposed to say, Norway where in 2005 a Gallop survey in sixty-five countries, indicated that Norway was the least religious country in Western Europe. And yet has a very low crime rate with a wide-ranging social safety net and social equity.
    Being "culturally religious" isn't the same as actually being religious in any orthopraxical sense. Also, Norway is A LOT more culturally homogenous. Norway also hasn't waged war on drugs or has anything like the turf wars like in Chicago. Norway also didn't have the same historical development as the US. Also, Europe's decline in religiosity is in a much broader historical development.

    If we want to look at the intersection of religiosity, tribalism, and violence, European history is a good case study.
    Ideological Vagrant (Yes, this is in Comic Sans.)

    Comment


    • #62
      Originally posted by Tassman View Post

      1) We have virtually the same DNA as chimpanzees but with higher intelligence. Humans have developed beyond the basic tribal level of chimpanzees but this is merely an extension of the standard tribalism of all the higher primates. It incorporates many tribes (not just one) under the leadership of an alpha male reidentified as a chieftain or king etc.

      2) Humanity does NOT need to be persuaded to cooperate. It instinctively does so as an evolved social animal.

      3) One can (and does) abstract, mythologize and philosophize about what we do at the social level, but this is not why we do it. We “do it” as a logical extension of the tribal social order characteristic of our species.
      1) One story is that humans and chimps are the same but with differences--the other story is that humans and chimps are different but have some similarities---whichever story we prefer, the fact remains that how humans deal with the environment and the problems/opportunities of survival are vastly different. This ability is embedded in our "nature" ---either by God or by "Nature" (natural evolution) the details are not important. We have this ability. ...and we know how to make use of it.
      2) Humans need to make sense of "why" we co-operate---as I said, it is inherently in our very nature to make sense of a splotch of ink and associate it with something.. So, even if it is instinct we still need a story---the abstract concept/myth of Nation, citizenship and belonging is a story that tries to make sense of the instinct to co-operate at a very large scale.
      3) Tribalism is great for social cohesion---but if we are to incorporate abstract concepts such as inherent/universal rights, human dignity, equality...etc...on a global scale, it is inadequate. For that we need concepts that override tribalism and create group cohesion at the level of global humanity.
      IMO, religio-philosophies (plural) can be beneficial abstractions if they are not tied to a territory/country/land ---then they have the potential to create larger, more global group cohesions (plural).

      Comment


      • #63
        ]
        Originally posted by Diogenes View Post

        Being "culturally religious" isn't the same as actually being religious in any orthopraxical sense.
        The USA can be classified as a religious country by any reasonable standard when compared to similar societies as in the UK, Norway or Australia etc. with their empty churches. And yet, unlike those societies, the US exhibits gross social inequities, extensive gun-violence and the highest incarceration rates in the world. In short, being Christian does not appear to result in compassionate behavior.

        Also, Norway is A LOT more culturally homogenous. Norway also hasn't waged war on drugs or has anything like the turf wars like in Chicago. Norway also didn't have the same historical development as the US. Also, Europe's decline in religiosity is in a much broader historical development.
        The USA has been culturally homogenous for most of its history, namely white Protestant Christian with a common heritage and language.

        If we want to look at the intersection of religiosity, tribalism, and violence, European history is a good case study
        Certainly. Notably the European Wars of Religion with their enormous death toll. Europe has overcome its differences and is, along with most of the world, signatories of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights i.e., the embodiment of cooperation among nations (tribes) for a social species such as us.
        “He felt that his whole life was a kind of dream and he sometimes wondered whose it was and whether they were enjoying it.” - Douglas Adams.

        Comment


        • #64
          Originally posted by siam View Post

          1) One story is that humans and chimps are the same but with differences--the other story is that humans and chimps are different but have some similarities---whichever story we prefer,
          These are NOT just stories. Homo sapiens are Great Apes along with Chimpanzees, Orangutans, Bonobos. We just happen to be the most intelligent of the primates.

          the fact remains that how humans deal with the environment and the problems/opportunities of survival are vastly different. This ability is embedded in our "nature" ---either by God or by "Nature" (natural evolution) the details are not important. We have this ability. ...and we know how to make use of it.
          Our group cooperation and cohesive instinct is “embedded in our nature”, just as it is among other social species. It is an evolved characteristic of biology and natural selection.

          2) Humans need to make sense of "why" we co-operate---as I said, it is inherently in our very nature to make sense of a splotch of ink and associate it with something.. So, even if it is instinct we still need a story---the abstract concept/myth of Nation, citizenship and belonging is a story that tries to make sense of the instinct to co-operate at a very large scale.
          3) Tribalism is great for social cohesion---but if we are to incorporate abstract concepts such as inherent/universal rights, human dignity, equality...etc...on a global scale, it is inadequate. For that we need concepts that override tribalism and create group cohesion at the level of global humanity.
          IMO, religio-philosophies (plural) can be beneficial abstractions if they are not tied to a territory/country/land ---then they have the potential to create larger, more global group cohesions (plural)
          Homo sapiens do NOT need to make sense of "why" we co-operate any more than our primate cousins do. It is instinctive. We might choose to try and understand its sociological mechanisms but this is not necessary for it to exist nor for our survival.
          “He felt that his whole life was a kind of dream and he sometimes wondered whose it was and whether they were enjoying it.” - Douglas Adams.

          Comment


          • #65
            Originally posted by Tassman View Post
            ]

            The USA can be classified as a religious country by any reasonable standard when compared to similar societies as in the UK, Norway or Australia etc. with their empty churches.


            I never said the USA wasn't culturally religious nor would I discount the US having higher religious affiliation, but I wouldn't consider someone who is culturally religious or religiously affiliated necessarily as "religious" (either in a good sense or a pejorative). Being actually "religious" would necessitate a corresponding praxis.

            And yet, unlike those societies, the US exhibits gross social inequities, extensive gun-violence and the highest incarceration rates in the world. In short, being Christian does not appear to result in compassionate behavior.
            There's a host a differences besides religious affiliation and culture between the US and European countries (or their former penal colonies). Solely blaming religious affiliation is disingenuous.

            Europe is more homogenous than the US. It's only with African and Muslim migration is Europe getting a taste of culture clash. For example, Lower Saxony in Germany attributed ~ 90% of a ~10% rise in crime during 2015 - 2016 due to migrants And, similar to the pattern in the US, a third of migrant crime was migrant on migrant. Furthermore, 17% of migrant crime was due to the 1% of migrants that were North African. (AP)


            The USA has been culturally homogenous for most of its history, namely white Protestant Christian with a common heritage and language.

            AHAHAHAHAAHHA.

            The US, as a melting pot, is not culturally homogenous. WASP culture is dominant thanks to its colonial past, but the US is far from homogenous especially when compared to Norway. There's a even a "Little Albania". The largest secondary culture is Black culture. I wouldn't say "African-American" as there are likely communities of African immigrants as distinct from the culture of individuals descendent of slaves. Religious differences abound as well in the US. The only homogenous areas of the US are rural and tribal areas. As you get into metro areas in the US, the homogeneity decreases. Catholics had a bit of a haven in the the colony Maryland but that came with problems with Protestants

            Certainly. Notably the European Wars of Religion with their enormous death toll. Europe has overcome its differences and is, along with most of the world, signatories of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights i.e., the embodiment of cooperation among nations (tribes) for a social species such as us.
            Yeah, it's take Europe centuries and hundreds of thousands, if not millions, dead to get over it's tribalism and it's still a bit unstable as the case with Brexit, Frexit, Danexit, Nexit, Grexit, Polexit, and just Euroscpeticism in general.
            Ideological Vagrant (Yes, this is in Comic Sans.)

            Comment


            • #66
              Originally posted by Tassman View Post

              1)These are NOT just stories. Homo sapiens are Great Apes along with Chimpanzees, Orangutans, Bonobos. We just happen to be the most intelligent of the primates.

              2)Our group cooperation and cohesive instinct is “embedded in our nature”, just as it is among other social species. It is an evolved characteristic of biology and natural selection.

              3)Homo sapiens do NOT need to make sense of "why" we co-operate any more than our primate cousins do. It is instinctive. We might choose to try and understand its sociological mechanisms but this is not necessary for it to exist nor for our survival.
              1) Yes---and we are ALL mouse!! chimps and apes and humans are all mouse---so...!? The definition of "human" is different depending on which story/premise we start with. According to your story---humans are primates----and I have no problem if that story makes sense to you. To another person we r all mice---and that is fine by me....Muslims have their own definition of "Human" , which would then effect ethico-moral principles.
              https://www.newscientist.com/article...mice-into-men/
              https://www.genome.gov/10001345/impo...ars%20ago.

              2) agreed

              3) If it is our nature then we "need"/desire. The need/desire to make sense of the world is in our nature.

              Comment


              • #67
                Originally posted by Diogenes View Post

                I never said the USA wasn't culturally religious nor would I discount the US having higher religious affiliation, but I wouldn't consider someone who is culturally religious or religiously affiliated necessarily as "religious" (either in a good sense or a pejorative). Being actually "religious" would necessitate a corresponding praxis. There's a host a differences besides religious affiliation and culture between the US and European countries (or their former penal colonies). Solely blaming religious affiliation is disingenuous.
                Good. Because what I’m arguing is that the origin of morality is biology and natural selection, not theology or bible-based rules of social behavior.

                Europe is more homogenous than the US. It's only with African and Muslim migration is Europe getting a taste of culture clash. For example, Lower Saxony in Germany attributed ~ 90% of a ~10% rise in crime during 2015 - 2016 due to migrants And, similar to the pattern in the US, a third of migrant crime was migrant on migrant. Furthermore, 17% of migrant crime was due to the 1% of migrants that were North African.
                The argument is about those nations which claim that morality originates from God. The Western Nation with the highest religion affiliation is the USA with its gross social inequities, extensive gun-violence and the highest incarceration rates in the world. This compared to the more equitable secular/atheist Western nations like Norway and Australia.

                The US, as a melting pot is not culturally homogenous. WASP culture is dominant thanks to its colonial past, but the US is far from homogenous especially when compared to Norway. There's a even a "Little Albania". The largest secondary culture is Black culture. I wouldn't say "African-American" as there are likely communities of African immigrants as distinct from the culture of individuals descendent of slaves. Religious differences abound as well in the US. The only homogenous areas of the US are rural and tribal areas. As you get into metro areas in the US, the homogeneity decreases. Catholics had a bit of a haven in the the colony Maryland but that came with problems with Protestants
                It was the DOMINANT white culture that made the rules and kept the blacks “in their place” via the Jim Crow Laws etc.

                Yeah, it's take Europe centuries and hundreds of thousands, if not millions, dead to get over it's tribalism and it's still a bit unstable as the case with Brexit, Frexit, Danexit, Nexit, Grexit, Polexit, and just Euroscpeticism in general.
                The issue in this instance is that it was religion and religious wars that threatened the stability of the European social order. This in the context of the origins of morality i.e., ‘God-given’ or arising from Natural Selection. I’m arguing the latter.

                “He felt that his whole life was a kind of dream and he sometimes wondered whose it was and whether they were enjoying it.” - Douglas Adams.

                Comment


                • #68
                  Originally posted by siam View Post

                  1) Yes---and we are ALL mouse!! chimps and apes and humans are all mouse---so...!? The definition of "human" is different depending on which story/premise we start with. According to your story---humans are primates----and I have no problem if that story makes sense to you. To another person we r all mice---and that is fine by me...
                  Humans (Homo sapiens) are a species of highly intelligent primates no different in principle than any other primate. This is NOT a “story”, it is Biological Anthropology, i.e., science.

                  .Muslims have their own definition of "Human" , which would then effect ethico-moral principles.
                  ALL religions have their own definition of “human”, but this is based upon alleged ‘revelation’ arising in the prescientific era - NOT verifiable facts.


                  “He felt that his whole life was a kind of dream and he sometimes wondered whose it was and whether they were enjoying it.” - Douglas Adams.

                  Comment


                  • #69
                    Originally posted by Tassman View Post

                    Good. Because what I’m arguing is that the origin of morality is biology and natural selection, not theology or bible-based rules of social behavior.


                    That's not the contention of the OP as the OP could just say God created human nature and biology, either specially or through a Guiding Hand and then ensoulment. The contention is that complete justice is required in order for morality to be meaningful and that atheism, as proposed by Western atheists, fails to achieve complete justice. Therefore under such atheism, morality is meaningless.

                    In fairness to Christianity, Christian ethics isn't all that bad. It's just a theistic variant of virtue ethics. From what I've seen, I think the greatest source of tension between Christians and atheists on the morality issue isn't the God part but rather is based on the tension between the virtue ethics of Christians and the utilitarian ethics that has hedonistic tendencies of atheists.


                    The argument is about those nations which claim that morality originates from God. The Western Nation with the highest religion affiliation is the USA with its gross social inequities, extensive gun-violence and the highest incarceration rates in the world. This compared to the more equitable secular/atheist Western nations like Norway and Australia.
                    Mere religious affiliation does not entails following a religion's praxis. The Church of Norway had an affiliation rate of 68.7% in 2019. So, if you're going to argue from mere religious affiliation, then the Church of Norway is moralising force of Norway.


                    It was the DOMINANT white culture that made the rules and kept the blacks “in their place” via the Jim Crow Laws etc.
                    Even after Civil Rights Era, WASP culture is still dominant, mostly due to population. It's influence is declining, but it's still dominant.


                    The issue in this instance is that it was religion and religious wars that threatened the stability of the European social order. This in the context of the origins of morality i.e., ‘God-given’ or arising from Natural Selection. I’m arguing the latter.
                    AHAHAHAHHAHA

                    Much like the US, Europe's violence had a myriad of complications. Competing monarchies and nationalism (like Otto von Bismarck [German unification], Garibaldi [Italian Unification, and Gavrilo Princip [some random Serbian nationalist who shot a random Archduke]) are top of the list. Religion often intertwined with the secular like with the Investiture controversy and the fight for religious freedom resulting the Peace of Augsburg and the Peace of Westphalia. The ambitions of the Hapsburg dynasty was another crucial factor. Then of course you have the French Revolution and Napoleon. It wasn't all religion's fault.
                    Ideological Vagrant (Yes, this is in Comic Sans.)

                    Comment


                    • #70
                      Originally posted by Diogenes View Post

                      That's not the contention of the OP as the OP could just say God created human nature and biology, either specially or through a Guiding Hand and then ensoulment. The contention is that complete justice is required in order for morality to be meaningful and that atheism, as proposed by Western atheists, fails to achieve complete justice. Therefore under such atheism, morality is meaningless.

                      In fairness to Christianity, Christian ethics isn't all that bad. It's just a theistic variant of virtue ethics. From what I've seen, I think the greatest source of tension between Christians and atheists on the morality issue isn't the God part but rather is based on the tension between the virtue ethics of Christians and the utilitarian ethics that has hedonistic tendencies of atheists.
                      Complete justice is NOT required "in order for morality to be meaningful”. You assume without good reason that ‘morality’ exists as an absolute value in and of itself. It does not. Morality is functional. It is a product of evolution and is only of value insomuch as it lends itself to our survival as a species. Hence, morals and ethics have evolved and varied to a degree from culture to culture over time.

                      Mere religious affiliation does not entails following a religion's praxis. The Church of Norway had an affiliation rate of 68.7% in 2019. So, if you're going to argue from mere religious affiliation, then the Church of Norway is moralising force of Norway.
                      The Church of Norway is the state religion and ALL citizens are automatically registered as members at birth - this is a hang-over from an earlier era. The majority of “members” are no longer practicing Christians and the “moralizing force” in Norway is grounded in secular humanism not religion.

                      Even after Civil Rights Era, WASP culture is still dominant, mostly due to population. It's influence is declining, but it's still dominant.
                      Indeed. WASP culture is still dominant in the USA and its social consequences are significant and detrimental to social equity.

                      Much like the US, Europe's violence had a myriad of complications. Competing monarchies and nationalism (like Otto von Bismarck [German unification], Garibaldi [Italian Unification, and Gavrilo Princip [some random Serbian nationalist who shot a random Archduke]) are top of the list. Religion often intertwined with the secular like with the Investiture controversy and the fight for religious freedom resulting the Peace of Augsburg and the Peace of Westphalia. The ambitions of the Hapsburg dynasty was another crucial factor. Then of course you have the French Revolution and Napoleon. It wasn't all religion's fault.
                      Nevertheless, throughout all of these political vicissitudes, the participants were Christian, which in no way addresses the origins of morality. Namely, whether or not morality arose via Natural Selection or was divinely revealed.
                      “He felt that his whole life was a kind of dream and he sometimes wondered whose it was and whether they were enjoying it.” - Douglas Adams.

                      Comment


                      • #71
                        Originally posted by Tassman View Post

                        1) Humans (Homo sapiens) are a species of highly intelligent primates no different in principle than any other primate. This is NOT a “story”, it is Biological Anthropology, i.e., science.

                        2) ALL religions have their own definition of “human”, but this is based upon alleged ‘revelation’ arising in the prescientific era - NOT verifiable facts.
                        Yr points raise interesting reflections....

                        1) I do "believe" in science and accept that much of science is "fact"/factual.
                        Yet...facts are interpreted. For you, the definition of human as primates makes sense, in your worldview....however, others (like me) might find it an inadequate definition. The concept of "human" is an abstraction. The "fact" is that genetically/biologically we are a collection of cells, a configuration of molecules, a variant of primate or mouse. So what makes our particular collection of cells "human"---and why does this label confer "value"---scientifically? for example---why are mice tested with experiments (science) whereas humans are not because it infringes on "ethics"? ---and controversies such as human stem cell research, human cloning research, ...etc

                        Any abstract concept, such as "Human",... can be part of a story. (paradigm). Abstract concepts/ideas are the toolkits with which we make sense of our world.

                        North America is a landmass on earth. It is divided into "Nations" and these are the story/myth that gives "definition" to large groups of people. A citizen/national of the United States can be different than a citizen/national of Canada because the concept of "Nation" is an abstract idea. It is a fact that a landmass exists on earth---but it is the abstract idea of (invisible) borders and the stories of the founding and the various rituals and celebrations that create group cohesion/identity/belonging. Nontheistic myths exist because it is our nature to create stories to make sense of our world.

                        2) "pre-scientific era"---is a myth probably developed in the enlightenment era (?) to create a linear and progressive explanation of evolution. One that is very "Western" as the conclusion is that the Enlightened European man is the most progressive and civilized. (...regardless of "fact")
                        Mathematics..." language of science" would not exist without the abstract concept of zero which comes to us from Indian religio-philosophy. In "fact" philosophy and science may have been at odds only in the West---for the rest of the world, these fields of knowledge were always complementary. (Islamicate history is one such example where various religio-philosophies mixed and fueled scientific progress...)
                        ...and speaking of "fact"---racism was "science" at one point---before being demoted to pseudo-science and discredited. Nevertheless, this view apparently made sense to some people...!....(and probably still does...)
                        https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_racism

                        Comment


                        • #72
                          Originally posted by Tassman View Post

                          Complete justice is NOT required "in order for morality to be meaningful”. You assume without good reason that ‘morality’ exists as an absolute value in and of itself. It does not. Morality is functional. It is a product of evolution and is only of value insomuch as it lends itself to our survival as a species. Hence, morals and ethics have evolved and varied to a degree from culture to culture over time.
                          I'm just reiterating the OP. Also, if the Christian wanted to, they could say God used evolution as the creative force for humans and then endowed them with a soul.



                          The Church of Norway is the state religion and ALL citizens are automatically registered as members at birth - this is a hang-over from an earlier era.

                          So we agree that mere religious affiliation doesn't necessarily entail religious praxis.



                          The majority of “members” are no longer practicing Christians and the “moralizing force” in Norway is grounded in secular humanism not religion.
                          I'm sympathetic to idea that secular humanism is rooted in Christianity. Atheism, especially a philosophically naturalistic atheism, lacks any ontological basis for notions like the universal dignitas of the human and human rights. For secular humanism, these are useful fictions. Crafting a social framework to what we have now can be convoluted. It's possible, but secular humanists don't put in the grunt work. The Hindu, Confucian, Grecian, and Roman systems all have a naturalness to hierarchies. Individuals from Aristotle to Seneca had no problem with slavery. The seed of abolitionism is Gregory of Nyssa. The separation of Church and State has Christian roots at the monastery of Cluny. John Locke, a pillar modern Western pollical philosophy, rooted his philosophy in God. The West is a product of its Christian heritage.



                          Nevertheless, throughout all of these political vicissitudes, the participants were Christian, which in no way addresses the origins of morality. Namely, whether or not morality arose via Natural Selection or was divinely revealed.
                          As you've agreed, religious affiliation itself is meaningless. Also, these political vicissitudes show the conflict that has plagued Europe isn't all religion's fault. The OP isn't about the origins

                          Ideological Vagrant (Yes, this is in Comic Sans.)

                          Comment


                          • #73
                            Originally posted by siam View Post

                            Yr points raise interesting reflections....

                            1) I do "believe" in science and accept that much of science is "fact"/factual.
                            Yet...facts are interpreted.
                            Scientific FACTS are NOT “interpreted”, they are falsified or verified.

                            For you, the definition of human as primates makes sense, in your worldview....however, others (like me) might find it an inadequate definition. The concept of "human" is an abstraction. The "fact" is that genetically/biologically we are a collection of cells, a configuration of molecules, a variant of primate or mouse. So what makes our particular collection of cells "human"---and why does this label confer "value"---scientifically? for example---why are mice tested with experiments (science) whereas humans are not because it infringes on "ethics"? ---and controversies such as human stem cell research, human cloning research, ...etc
                            The human animal is a primate, this is not in dispute scientifically.

                            “Primate, in zoology, any mammal of the group that includes the lemurs, lorises, tarsiers, monkeys, apes, and humans. The order Primates, with its 300 or more species, is the third most diverse order of mammals, after rodents (Rodentia) and bats (Chiroptera)”.

                            https://www.britannica.com/animal/primate-mammal

                            Any abstract concept, such as "Human",... can be part of a story. (paradigm). Abstract concepts/ideas are the toolkits with which we make sense of our world.
                            “Human” is NOT an abstract concept. See above.

                            North America is a landmass on earth. It is divided into "Nations" and these are the story/myth that gives "definition" to large groups of people. A citizen/national of the United States can be different than a citizen/national of Canada because the concept of "Nation" is an abstract idea. It is a fact that a landmass exists on earth---but it is the abstract idea of (invisible) borders and the stories of the founding and the various rituals and celebrations that create group cohesion/identity/belonging. Nontheistic myths exist because it is our nature to create stories to make sense of our world.
                            This is all based upon category errors.

                            2) "pre-scientific era"---is a myth probably developed in the enlightenment era (?) to create a linear and progressive explanation of evolution. One that is very "Western" as the conclusion is that the Enlightened European man is the most progressive and civilized. (...regardless of "fact")
                            Mathematics..." language of science" would not exist without the abstract concept of zero which comes to us from Indian religio-philosophy. In "fact" philosophy and science may have been at odds only in the West---for the rest of the world, these fields of knowledge were always complementary. (Islamicate history is one such example where various religio-philosophies mixed and fueled scientific progress...)
                            ...and speaking of "fact"---racism was "science" at one point---before being demoted to pseudo-science and discredited. Nevertheless, this view apparently made sense to some people...!....(and probably still does...)
                            The "pre-scientific era" is NOT a myth, it is demonstrable fact of the state of knowledge of the natural world prior to the emergence of modern science during the Renaissance. “The Scientific Revolution was a series of events that marked the emergence of modern science during the early modern period, when developments in mathematics, physics, astronomy, biology and chemistry transformed the views of society about nature”. Wikipedia



                            “He felt that his whole life was a kind of dream and he sometimes wondered whose it was and whether they were enjoying it.” - Douglas Adams.

                            Comment


                            • #74
                              Originally posted by Diogenes View Post

                              I'm just reiterating the OP. Also, if the Christian wanted to, they could say God used evolution as the creative force for humans and then endowed them with a soul.
                              Christians could say that certainly, but they would be unable to substantiate their claim NOR demonstrate the existence of ‘souls’.

                              So we agree that mere religious affiliation doesn't necessarily entail religious praxis.
                              Religious affiliation indicates the value system held by its adherents and interestingly, the least religious nations (including Norway) tend to be the most equitable and least crime-ridden, which seems to mitigate against God-based revealed morality.

                              I'm sympathetic to idea that secular humanism is rooted in Christianity. Atheism, especially a philosophically naturalistic atheism, lacks any ontological basis for notions like the universal dignitas of the human and human rights. For secular humanism, these are useful fictions. Crafting a social framework to what we have now can be convoluted. It's possible, but secular humanists don't put in the grunt work. The Hindu, Confucian, Grecian, and Roman systems all have a naturalness to hierarchies. Individuals from Aristotle to Seneca had no problem with slavery. The seed of abolitionism is Gregory of Nyssa. The separation of Church and State has Christian roots at the monastery of Cluny. John Locke, a pillar modern Western pollical philosophy, rooted his philosophy in God. The West is a product of its Christian heritage.
                              Secular humanism is NOT rooted in Christianity or any philosophical system. It derives from biology and natural selection. In short, our evolved instinct for cooperation and altruism promotes the social cohesion necessary for our survival as a social species. The same can be seen in other intelligent animals to a limited extent in simpler forms.

                              As you've agreed, religious affiliation itself is meaningless. Also, these political vicissitudes show the conflict that has plagued Europe isn't all religion's fault. The OP isn't about the origins
                              I have not agreed. See above.


                              “He felt that his whole life was a kind of dream and he sometimes wondered whose it was and whether they were enjoying it.” - Douglas Adams.

                              Comment

                              Related Threads

                              Collapse

                              Topics Statistics Last Post
                              Started by seer, 02-16-2021, 09:31 AM
                              178 responses
                              806 views
                              0 likes
                              Last Post Diogenes  
                              Started by rstrats, 02-13-2021, 01:23 PM
                              26 responses
                              209 views
                              0 likes
                              Last Post Cow Poke  
                              Started by seer, 02-11-2021, 12:34 PM
                              73 responses
                              590 views
                              0 likes
                              Last Post Tassman
                              by Tassman
                               
                              Started by Starlight, 02-08-2021, 03:38 AM
                              12 responses
                              116 views
                              0 likes
                              Last Post siam
                              by siam
                               
                              Started by Diogenes, 02-02-2021, 01:46 PM
                              51 responses
                              313 views
                              0 likes
                              Last Post YHWH RULES  
                              Working...
                              X