Atheists and Morality

Ruv Draba said:

I'm an atheist and have been since my early teens. My reasons are more rational than moral - I simply see a lot of deceit in the major religions. Atheism by itself doesn't offer much by way of moral guidance, personal development and wisdom. Atheists have to look elsewhere for those things (if they choose to look at all).

Elsewhere I recently made the assertion that the atheists I know personally don't tend to look very hard or very far for moral guidance, personal development and wisdom. My stock of inspirational atheistic role-models is rather small. This created a minor furor among those who feel that they're either better than my opinion admits, or that I shouldn't disparage them if they're not.

I opened this thread because I think it's useful and encouraging to list the self-sacrificing, disciplined things that atheists do out of compassion and love of humanity. Theists do a lot of this stuff (and take credit for a lot of it too!) Let's hear tales of atheistic inspiration. I'm not looking for tales of rock-chucking here (we do plenty of that), or the fact that an atheistic doctor saves lives just as a theistic doctor does, but rather tales of atheists doing exceptionally compassionate or self-sacrificing things.

I have a small stock of tales I'll add when I have the time, but for now, over to you.

(And in a related matter, if you're an atheist where do you look for moral guidance and wisdom? How much are you willing to sacrifice to attain those things?)

Click to expand...

Hi,
Something you said, caught my eye. You say you're an atheist because you see a lot of deceit in the major religions. Do you not see any deceit among atheists? Are you saying atheists do not lie?
Rob

He's not saying atheists don't lie. In fact I'd say that we atheists lie a lot(as do all people), only we're willing to admit it .

I think for me, something that is irritating is that so many people do charity work as means of "being right with god". That's not to say thatatheists are pure either, as some of them do charitable works as a means of enhancing their reputation or whatnot. It's just all of these charities that are driven by a religious purpose seem hypocritical. If I'm doing something out of charity, I don't really expect any form of compensation, whether in this life or the next.

Myself, I teach underpriveldged teenagers every summer. The pay is awful, the food isn't very good, the hours are incredibly long, but it is rewarding to know that you might be the person that helps the kid get out of the destructive cycle they're currently on. Seeing the homelives that these kids come form is pretty shocking. It's amazing how many have parents that are abusive or are drug addicted zombies. Yet, some of the most intelligent kids I've worked with have come from this program.

I don't teach for the pay(I make 300 a week, and work about 100 hours a week), but I teach because the idea of helping someone reach their potential appeals to me. I do it because I feel better about myself for doing so, as the knowledge that I've got isn't mine, and the best thing I can do is try to propogate as much of it as possible as a means of "earning it", as I wasn't the one who discovered any of the principles I teach, I merely learned and understood them. So perhaps, I do have a selfish reason for doing what I do, but at the same time I also understand that what I know, is only due to others imparting knowledge onto me, and I try to continue this tradition.

I don't get my moral guidance from anywhere. I do what I want to do. I've done nothing exceptionally altrusitic in my life, but I'm only 21. So far I've spent six months working as a counsellor at a summer camp in the states (for no money, what I get paid goes towards plane tickets), I've volunteered at MENCAP playgroups, I'm a certified life-guard and higher-level first aid giver, I used to mentor kids with reading difficulties at school, and if I see a homeless guy on the street I'll buy him a cup of tea.

On the flip side, I enjoy recreational drugs every now and then. Some might call that immoral; I certainly don't. IMO alcohol is the most dangerous drug, which is why I don't really drink, but Jesus was all about the wine, so I'm probably safe in God's eyes.

Religion is a bad place to look for morality. A lot of the ten commandments condemn atheism and worshipping other gods as worse sins than committing crimes. That's a very backwards way of looking at it, and won't help anybody, especially if you can lead a life of sin and repent on the deathbed.

I do thins like that a lot Ruv, and I tend to be self-sacrificing by nature.

I think a lot of this comes from both my upbringing, as well as the way my mind works(I'm an engineer, so I think in a more realistic fashion by necessity). I understand from what I do for living, that choices have to be made, every decision has a consequence, and all decisions carry an unknown risk. In fact, I'd go so far as saying that engineers are probably in a unique position to talk about this kind of thing, as the best we can ever do is make VERY educated guesses.

The nature of what we do makes exactness, and absolutes impossible, so the best we can work with are likelyhoods(as I've kind of mentioned in a different post). We function by trying to model the world as best we can, but at its heart I know that I'm taking real liberties in simplifying reality.

Life is largely like that. I try to take the limited knowledge that I have, and use it to make what I percieve as being the best decisions. If you really want to learn about life, play a lot of Texas Hold'em. Trust me after a few real life tournaments, you'll learn more about the truth of life in that game, then you will ever learn reading philosophy, the bible, or any other book. The reason for this, is in the vast majority of the cases your information is severly limited and you can only make guesses as to what the truth is. However the more you play, the more you understand that poker as in life, is a combination of choice and chance. Chance might play a huge role, but in the long term choice will always win out. The lucky player may win occasionally, and even destroy the most talented players, but the guy who will actually make money in the long term is the person who can make good decisions.

Perhaps, Ruv, you should head to a casino and learn about life by gracing a few poker tables. You might gain more insight on life by dropping a hundred bucks, then you'd realize.

Ruv Draba said:

Quite the reverse, Rwam. Please see this thread for further discussion.

Click to expand...

I read your other post, Ruv. Quite thoughtful, indeed. Although I'm one who believes there's a God out there who "loves" us, I share your frustration with organized religions. Once they transform a spiritual relationship with a Maker into a corporate institution of spiritual dispensing, somewhere along the way they often become more devoted to their agendas instead of to God.

Ruv Draba said:

. . .tales of atheists doing exceptionally compassionate or self-sacrificing things. . . .

Click to expand...

That might be a tough thing to research, as atheists do not necessarily trumpet their atheism. It is possible to simply reject the superstitions and mythologies and to go about the business of life -- including concern for others because it is right, not because some imaginary being dictates it (or for that matter dictates the shunning or murder of those who favor a different imaginary being).

For that matter, how many started out as nominal believers (raised in a church-going family, or in one that at least made a nod toward some religion or other) and came to reject the mythology/superstition without making a big deal of it? It is possible to simply drift away from the mythology.

--Ken

Ruv Draba said:

(And in a related matter, if you're an atheist where do you look for moral guidance and wisdom? How much are you willing to sacrifice to attain those things?)

Click to expand...

I can only speak for myself, but I look mostly for moral guidance in plain common sense.
Wisdom is harder to come by, but I think it's mostly attained through experiences of life. I find it hard to attain wisdom through other peoples experiences just because they are not my own.

I'd also like to add that (and again only speaking for myself here) the longer I live, the more conscious I've become of my choices - and the consequences thereof - and that it sometimes makes me hesitate to go down a specific path. If common sense can't help me as a moral guide in those situations, I search myself for inner strength and courage. If I believe that I'm strong enough to handle a difficult path I will take it. I might not gain anything from choosing this path, in fact I might stand to lose a lot, but I might decide to take it anyway just because it's harder and the experience that I stand to gain might very well be worth it.

Ruv Draba said:

I opened this thread because I think it's useful and encouraging to list the self-sacrificing, disciplined things that atheists do out of compassion and love of humanity.

Click to expand...

I wish I could add to your list, but I'm not known to be a very disciplined, self-sacrifying, humanitarian or loving person. To tell you the truth I've been called a bitch more often than I care to remember. But I did list a few things I do in this thread; http://www.absolutewrite.com/forums/showthread.php?p=2336716#post2336716

I don't do them for any of the reasons you suggested, I do them simply because I feel they are the right thing to do, right now, in this stage of my life.

Dommo said:

He's not saying atheists don't lie. In fact I'd say that we atheists lie a lot(as do all people), only we're willing to admit it .

I think for me, something that is irritating is that so many people do charity work as means of "being right with god" Why is it irritating? Same end as anyone, why do the means matter?. That's not to say thatatheists are pure either, as some of them do charitable works as a means of enhancing their reputation or whatnot. It's just all of these charities that are driven by a religious purpose seem hypocritical. If I'm doing something out of charity, I don't really expect any form of compensation, whether in this life or the next. (Many Christians see helping as a reward in and of itself. That the consequence of being right with God is love and compassion.)

Myself, I teach underpriveldged teenagers every summer. The pay is awful, the food isn't very good, the hours are incredibly long, but it is rewarding to know that you might be the person that helps the kid get out of the destructive cycle they're currently on (And see, you sound just like many Christians I know ). Seeing the homelives that these kids come form is pretty shocking. It's amazing how many have parents that are abusive or are drug addicted zombies. Yet, some of the most intelligent kids I've worked with have come from this program.

I don't teach for the pay(I make 300 a week, and work about 100 hours a week), but I teach because the idea of helping someone reach their potential (What do you think the goal of a lot of religions are? Think past the atheist dogma of Religion and deceit, and think about the real goal of spirituality.) appeals to me. I do it because I feel better about myself for doing so, as the knowledge that I've got isn't mine, and the best thing I can do is try to propogate as much of it as possible as a means of "earning it", as I wasn't the one who discovered any of the principles I teach, I merely learned and understood them. So perhaps, I do have a selfish reason for doing what I do, but at the same time I also understand that what I know, is only due to others imparting knowledge onto me, and I try to continue this tradition (And where do you think you got that tradition, hmm?).

Click to expand...

I merely wanted to mention how Christlike you sound here, which I find absolutely fascinating.

AMCrenshaw said:

I merely wanted to mention how Christlike you sound here, which I find absolutely fascinating.

Click to expand...

Obviously Christ Himself was an Atheist since He would not have been
wandering around believing in Himself or expecting to save Himself etc.

Higgins said:

Obviously Christ Himself was an Atheist since He would not have been
wandering around believing in Himself or expecting to save Himself etc.

Click to expand...

Although I should consider this comment for its sarcasm (which is excellent), I will reply to it this way:

First, you already know Christ was born Jewish.

Second, Could Christ's message have been for people to create a union between body and spirit? Or between Self and God? If this is the case, then hasn't his real gift been to exemplify his own message - say, by his existence as One with God or as "totally human and totally divine" ?

I know what typical doctrine is. But consider a non-dualistic approach to Christianity and see what happens. It's scripturally sound; however, if that's not your thing I understand.

I will take this debate elsewhere, but of course, I wasn't at all trying to "thread-jack." Due apologies. And satire/sarcasm, either way...I read it in fun-nature. Just as I spoke.

But there are serious points in there, on both sides. Sorry you didn't get what I got out of it.


Also, in spirit of the original post on this thread:

A man named Sherwin Wine (he wrote Judaism Beyond God) was an atheist/nontheist who still valued the Jewish culture. More importantly, instead of paying lip service to any deity or to a Rabbi, he went around the world to help children, to spread messages of peace and love in places I don't think I'd go right now. Basically, he had a sense that the concept of God as typically understood was not doing the job to appropriate ethics. Or, as many would point out, that the ethics were carried out for selfish reasons. However, he was very outspoken against Capitalist abuse against the already-poor; he, after Ehrenreich (she wrote Nickel and Dimed ) became very well known, was well-noted in his own right.

The sect that he started revived that ethic without the dogma attached to it. And, of course, more importantly one of his main aims was to liberate the low castes of society, so to speak.

Lastly, I almost forgot, he died probably a year or two ago on a trip to Africa, where his organization was donating food and installing water pumps, I think. Oddly enough, I think he died in a bus accident...

I opened this thread because I think it's useful and encouraging to list the self-sacrificing, disciplined things that atheists do out of compassion and love of humanity.

Click to expand...

I never keep tabs, but I know this: people always think I'm Christian because I have lots of compassion. What they call compassion, I just call living my life. When I reveal I'm an atheist, their response is usually..."But you are spiritual, right?" My response is no.

People are always shocked to hear that and tell me I have "Christian values." Ha! As to not offend Christians in general, I'll leave that alone. That said, these same individuals that state I have "Christian values" are not 1/10 the person I am. Each will readily admit that.

It stands to reason that an atheist would be less self-sacrificing than say, a christian.

For instance. You have the opportunity to save a child, but doing so will cost your life. A christian is far more likely to do the "self-less" act, because he believes he will not only be rewarded for it, but also believes that there is nothing to fear in death.

An athiest, on the other hand, believes that this life is his only life, and that his only reward for saving the kid will be being turned into food for worms. Naturally, an athiest would be more careful with his one and only life than a christian, because he has everything to lose while a christian stands only to gain (eternity in paradise surrounded by friends, family, in the presence of god, etc).

So, while it IS true that more believers would probably save the kid than athiests, the athiests that did choose his life over their own would be far more self-less than the christians who did the same. In fact, one might reason that a christian sacrificing himself is really not all that self-less, considering that he stands to benefit. True self-lessness comes from a lack of concern over one's self... So yea. My 2 cents.

Mr. Anonymous said:

It stands to reason that an atheist would be less self-sacrificing than say, a christian.

For instance. You have the opportunity to save a child, but doing so will cost your life. A christian is far more likely to do the "self-less" act, because he believes he will not only be rewarded for it, but also believes that there is nothing to fear in death.

An athiest, on the other hand, believes that this life is his only life, and that his only reward for saving the kid will be being turned into food for worms. Naturally, an athiest would be more careful with his one and only life than a christian, because he has everything to lose while a christian stands only to gain (eternity in paradise surrounded by friends, family, in the presence of god, etc).

So, while it IS true that more believers would probably save the kid than athiests, the athiests that did choose his life over their own would be far more self-less than the christians who did the same. In fact, one might reason that a christian sacrificing himself is really not all that self-less, considering that he stands to benefit. True self-lessness comes from a lack of concern over one's self... So yea. My 2 cents.

Click to expand...

Seriously? Christians are more likely to be more self-less than non-believers? Wow, that's a mighty big conclusion based on what evidence?

A self-less person will put others' needs before their own. Period. That doesn't sound particularly Christian or Jewish or Rastafarian to me. That sounds like love to me. Fortunately love is a feature anyone can practice no matter what they believe.

To be clear, love (in Christian terms, but probably in any term) is self-less. Period. But love is supposed to be the center of Christian ethic.

I'm learning it's the same throughout, however.

AMCrenshaw said:

I'm learning it's the same throughout, however.

Click to expand...

Nice save. I would hate to think that only Christians are credited with being able to practice love, self less or otherwise.

Virtue, love is not the sole property of Christians or any religion or no religion. People are as good or as bad as they will be regardless of their professed ethics.

Old saying that remains true for everyone "Watch what they do and not what they say." A good person will do good things for family and community, a bad person won't. We all live on the sliding scale between the poles of good and bad, which explains why I have Kevlar sewn into the butt of my pants.

Ruv- I see your point in starting this thread but while on the one hand it shows that altruism and atheism are not mutually exclusive, it does a real job on humility. Rest assured that non-believers give of themselves in whatever ways they wish to, just like everyone else.

I got my morales from rational thinking. It is true that while I don't believe in a god, it doesont mean that religion didn't at least point out some good guidelines for living.

I have no belief in any kind of deity, at all. But that doesont mean that the gods of the major religions are right about a lot of things. Whether or not the ten commandments were written by a god or not, I dont care. But they do make sense to me.

I used my own experiences as well, and came up with a morale code of my own. (which doesont really differ that much from the morale code of a religious person)

I try to help out and love my fellow humans, no matter what they believe. I think that both atheists and theists will agree that the world today needs more love, regardless of your beliefs.

Just a thought.

Anonymous.

I could make the counterpoint that much of the violence and horrible things in this world only occur because people believe in an afterlife. Would terrorists be willing to commit suicide to murder people if they thought that all they'd end up as, was worm food as you put it as opposed to getting to bang a ton of virgins?

In a heat of the moment situation where child is at risk is an unrealistic argument to make, and there are many factors to take into account. Is the potential rescuer a relative? Do they like kids? And so on. Would I be willing to risk my life for a child that wasn't mine, or known personally to me? I'm not sure, as I've not been put into that situation. Would I be willing to do it if many children were at risk(I fall on a hand grenade that lands in the middle of a gaggle of kids)? Much more likely, but I'm still not sure.

We all inherently value our lives more than those of others, and it takes A LOT to get one of us to willing sacrifice our lives. I highly doubt that you Anonymous, would be willing to save the life of murderer. You see, the point is that lives have relative value. At some point most of us come to the conclusion that X amount of lives is enough to warrant self sacrifice. I might not throw myself in front of a bus to save 1 kid, but to save 10 I probably would.

It's a thought not many people want to think about, as it inherently implies that a human life has a specific value. In truth it does. We value children more than a child molester or murderer. However things get complicated when that child molester just so happens to be the best brain surgeon in the country, and who's death would cause the deaths of countless others. There in lies the problem.

I do what I do, because I choose to do so, and because typically I get some kind of benefit from it. I teach because I feel it is something that needs to be done, and because I feel it is a duty to me as a vessel of the knowledge I've attained, because I did not earn it, I learned it. I didn't come up with the mathematical principles, someone else did, however I do not want the knowledge to be lost, so I try to propagate what I know to the next generation. So for me, in the case teaching, I do it out of duty, and I do it because I feel it's something worth doing. I benefit by knowing that I perhaps might be the one to get a kid out of poverty, and that I actually did try to make our world a bit better.

Mom'sWrite,
Seriously? Christians are more likely to be more self-less than non-believers? Wow, that's a mighty big conclusion based on what evidence?
It's an argument that makes sense to me. Whether we are aware of it or not, we are always looking out for ourselves, consciously and subconsciously. I believe it makes perfect sense for something as significant as belief in afterlife, god, etc to influence all other aspects of our lives. Do not misunderstand me. I'm not saying that only christians can be "self-less." But what I am saying is that christians, and other types of believers have more to gain from being "good people." That's all I was trying to establish.

A self-less person will put others' needs before their own. Period. That doesn't sound particularly Christian or Jewish or Rastafarian to me. That sounds like love to me. Fortunately love is a feature anyone can practice no matter what they believe.
I used christian as an example to stand in for any similar religion (Judaism, Islam, etc that has a concept of good and evil, rewards for good deeds and punishments for bad).

As for love. Very few people in this world can claim to love a stranger as much as they love themselves. Such a viewpoint is encouraged by certain religions, and is therefore more prevalent (at least that's what it seems to me) among believers of said religions.

Dommo,

I could make the counterpoint that much of the violence and horrible things in this world only occur because people believe in an afterlife. Would terrorists be willing to commit suicide to murder people if they thought that all they'd end up as, was worm food as you put it as opposed to getting to bang a ton of virgins?

I concede that you have a point. I will be the first to say that religion can be used as a potent brainwashing tool, and that some of the greatest atrocities in human history have been done in the name of god.

In a heat of the moment situation where child is at risk is an unrealistic argument to make, and there are many factors to take into account. Is the potential rescuer a relative? Do they like kids? And so on. Would I be willing to risk my life for a child that wasn't mine, or known personally to me? I'm not sure, as I've not been put into that situation. Would I be willing to do it if many children were at risk(I fall on a hand grenade that lands in the middle of a gaggle of kids)? Much more likely, but I'm still not sure.

In the hypothetical situation, it is only one child. A complete stranger to you. Perhaps it wasn't the best example to use. However, my point was simply this.
1) If I believe in heaven, I am not afraid to die.
2) If I die to save a child, then I will go to heaven for my self sacrifice.
Ergo, why not save a life and go to heaven? Win win. I realize that in a spur of the moment situation you wouldn't be sitting there, thinking all this through, but I also believe that our beliefs and convictions, the things we come to hold as truths to our existence, do influence our actions, not just on the conscious level, but on the subconscious one as well.

We all inherently value our lives more than those of others, and it takes A LOT to get one of us to willing sacrifice our lives.
Exactly. A eternal paradise is something that would constitute A LOT.

I might not throw myself in front of a bus to save 1 kid, but to save 10 I probably would.
Perhaps. But do you do that out of "selflessness?" Or do you do it because you would be unable to live with the shame and guilt of letting them all die while you live on? Can it really be considered "selfless" then?

I do what I do, because I choose to do so, and because typically I get some kind of benefit from it.
The key to my argument. What greater benefit is there than eternal paradise?

I teach because I feel it is something that needs to be done, and because I feel it is a duty to me as a vessel of the knowledge I've attained, because I did not earn it, I learned it.
Ah, a teacher. You have my greatest respect, sir. You are a brave soul. lol. Slightly off topic, but what made you decide to become a teacher (just curious, as the thought has crossed my mind).

I benefit by knowing that I perhaps might be the one to get a kid out of poverty, and that I actually did try to make our world a bit better.
Some would argue that even the most charitable acts can not really be considered selfless.
Take, for example, the man who donates money to charity. Donating money makes him feel good, and proud. He feels like he's done something important. So he donates again. And again. And continues feeling good. His benefit is not just that he is helping others, but he is also feeling good about himself. On a subconscious level, he may come to associate giving to charities with a state of mental wellbeing. Is his action then, truly selfless?

The last thing I wanted to do is offend anyone. However, I did want to establish that, humans, as with all animals, have certain survival instincts that lead them to look out for what they believe to be in their own best interests. An atheist and a devout christian/jew/muslim/etc both have the opportunity to save the child from the bus. And there are members of both groups that would save the kid, as well as members of both that, when it comes down to it, would not. But the Christian/jew/muslim undoubtedly has more to gain, and nothing to lose, while the exact opposite is true for the atheist.

So, what is the cliffnotes of all my rambling? Religion can be a very powerful external motivating force for doing good deeds, while for an athiest, that motivating force needs to come from within.

Please don't misunderstand my argument. I am in no way trying to say that atheists are immoral, whatever. I am an atheist myself, after all.