![]() |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Thu, 1 Feb 2018 19:17:51 -0800 (PST), Quadibloc
wrote: However, religion, by its very nature, posits the existence of God, and so it will put forward moral absolutes even in the absence of secular ethical philosophers who propose natural law theory. Not all religions do this, or at the least, they do it to very different degrees. Religion is - one of the forces in this world that discourage people from lying, cheating, and stealing, and it is a force that encourages people to make charitable contributions, and so on. A coin with two sides. Religion is also one of the forces of the world that enables people in lying, cheating, and stealing. (A recent study on charitable giving found that when you remove giving to churches themselves- which is hardly charitable- nonreligious people give more.) If non-religious thinking goes to the extreme that you advocate of being different from religious thinking, then it has the problem that it will fail to provide moral guidance in a form that is understandable to ordinary people. Actually, if we can teach ordinary people to avoid dogma, it isn't at all hard for them to understand the basis of humanism. The idea is quite natural for modern, western people. A good deal of the conflict we see in our societies today (most especially in the U.S.) comes from the dissonance created by a religion-based moral code that is increasingly seen as wrong by more and more people. That our innate sense of fairness and justice reflects something as absolute as mathematics - may or may not be true, but it seems the best way for us to understand it at this time. This innate sense, which I refer to as our moral engine, does appear universal. It has an organic basis (in brain structure) and even exists in some other animals to some degree. But do not confuse it with moral strictures, which are entirely invented by people and their societies. A sense of fairness and justice does not in the least preclude moral systems that support slavery and genocide, for instance. Humanism is the only basis I know of for defining moral strictures that seems actually able to produce the sort of world most enlightened, modern people seem to wish for. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
The very first presidential effort to ever address Light Pollution: AlGore.org Statement on Light Pollution | Ed[_2_] | Amateur Astronomy | 20 | April 25th 07 12:30 PM |
light pollution | g | Misc | 1 | October 26th 04 04:24 PM |
Light pollution | Steve | UK Astronomy | 7 | June 12th 04 08:42 PM |
Light Pollution | Philip | Amateur Astronomy | 19 | August 11th 03 10:48 PM |