Ethics & Religion

[surfermaw]

If ethics replaced religion, how many of the world's problems would not exist?

[Cheswick2.0]

1. They aren't mutually exclusive

In fact religion is a pretty universal way of teaching ethics to the next generation. Of course you can also have ethics without religion. So I say to each his own and stop the bullshit religion bashing.

[handywork]

6. ethics like bashing a child's head against stones...

and finding ways to best subjugate women.

[Cheswick2.0]

13. yeah, cause other people have never done those kinds of things

:eyes:

[handywork]

17. That may be true...

but the point is that at least the christian religion does not teach ethics any better than a society that condones smashing baby heads on stones...

[CulturalNomad]

2. quite a few would evaporate - but is it even worth thinking about

because the idea that religion will ever be replaced is fantasy....

[H2O Man]

3. none.

Those same people who are good would be good, and those who are bad would remain bad, and the majority of us would remain the same combination of good and bad. We'd simply be substituting words for the same concepts.

[troublemaker]

4. 90% right

but religion has the drawback of granting cultural legitimacy to irrational but satisfying thoughts. Being civil to the religious requires cutting irrationalism some slack and makes overtly irrational ideas like invading Iraq as pay-back for 9-11 less presumptively laughable.

[H2O Man]

8. I respectfully disagree.

I am religious. My beliefs teach me to oppose murder, and it makes no difference if the violent person is charles manson or george bush. I have yet to meet a person who believes that this war is justified by religion. (Yes, I've seen some on tv.) But the fact remains that george bush's ethics are his religion, and calling them by any other name would not change his behavior in any way whatsoever. If it would, clearly someone would have requested that he act in an ethical manner, and he would have changed. It's not the lable, it is the behavior.

[Solon]

5. While the premise seems simple...

it is much more complicated than that. It's more a battle of human nature than religion in and of itself. Religions are used as to excuse the actions of those in power, but Religion is not neccessarily at fault for it. Wars for example, are usually fought for land, money, and power, no more, no less. If religion didn't exist, then something else will rise to replace it as a justification, Nationalism for example. "Those People aren't ETHICAL!!! To War, MEN, TO WAR!!!!"

[handywork]

7. yeah i agree...

but religion gives the non-leaders a reason to do it. I dont think we would have men flying planes into buildings or suicide bombers in Israel if it weren't for religion... the leaders may still want the land or hate americans because of our policies (i mean our freedoms) but no one would carry out the other aspects

[Solon]

11. Actually I think they would...

hear me out, first I am NOT condoning the attacks on 9/11 or any terrorist activities. However, technically OBL had a valid "Beef" with the United States for putting a Base in HIS Country (Nationalism). Even earlier than his beef with us, we overthrew Iran's democratic government back in the fifties, setting up the anger and resentment that will explode in 1979. In addition to this is the I/P scenario where thousands were displaced from their homes by a U.S. supported government. Now add in Saddam Hussein, our man in the Middle East used and abused his power and then, mistakenly thinking he had our approval, invaded Kuwait, but you know us, just an excuse to put a base in Saudi Arabia. So by now, you have many young men and women, with lives destroyed through direct or indirect actions of the United States. Most of these people have nothing to lose anyways, and I have no doubt, that even without Islam as their religion that suicide attacks would have still been carried out. I didn't even get into some of the colonial shenanigans of the British before all this shit. Do you honestly think they wouldn't do this stuff if they were atheist?

[handywork]

12. ok i see your point...

About being pissed off. But I just dont really see people killing themselves if they did not believe in some sort of reward in the afterlife. Now I do think they would do some crazy shit and risk their lives on a daily basis, but not blow themselves up. and that is what is the hardest to defend. people who aren't concered with the conciquences cause they're dead.

[Solon]

14. Yes but then again, even Atheists can have no fear of death...

just poof, and your gone. What do you have to lose then, particularly if it is for what you think is a noble cause.

[handywork]

16. I guess i just dont think the motivation would be there...

[gottaB]

9. Bush syndrome

the ethical equivalent of solipsism, in other words, Bush is a sociopath.

But think of the philosophical implications. Is there an ethical reason why we should care about other people?

And theologically, I'm convinced Bush believes in a merciless, vengeful God. He's obviously projecting. Okay, but what if God is a sociopath. Why not?

Problem with that?

[Az]

10. Its an interesting question

I will offer a quote from a Christian I know.

"If I didn't believe in god there are a few people I would take a shotgun to right now."

The question here is difficult to answer. We cannot magically remove religion from the world and determine if she would go on a killing spree. But it does indicate that there are a lot of people that believe the only thing keeping them in line is the threat of damnation and the wrath of god.

Questions of god aside think of religion as a placebo. Suppose you gave someone a sugar pill and told them that it was monitoring their behaviour. Any immoral behaviour and it will start releasing all sorts of nastiness into the subjects system. Imagine any number horrible symptoms. This will have an effect on the person's behaviour.

Religion has evolved along the path which best enables it to propogate its teachings. A strong society is a very effective base from which to propogate. Thus religion favors enforcing behaviour that leads to strong societies.

The problem comes about when the religion finds itself at odds with newly discovered moral understanding from the society. Because religion favors a fixed notion morality it will find itself at odds with the ever changing nature of post modern society.

[handywork]

18. no offense to your friend...

but i'm not sure i would want to hang out with someone who's only reason for not going off and shooting people is religion.... I'm an athiest but this doesn't give me the go ahead to run around shooting people i hate. ON eof my biggest problems with religion is the fact that people feel like it's the only way a person can be moral and i think that's just silly...

[Nikia]

15. I disagree that would solve problems

I think that religion that is used to justify wars is a form of Nationalism. In the past and in many parts of the world, religion and Nationalism (or smaller society) are intertwined. Modern America is pluralistic in ethnicity and religion. Its Nationalism is based on the ideals of the founding fathers that many other modern countries have now adopted. Now we are at a point where many of these freedoms are being taken away and security is held to be more important as these ideals. We cannot rely on these ideals to hold American Nationalism anymore just as the fall of Communism couldn't hold together Yugoslavia or the Soviet Union. Bush has chosen religion to be the new American Nationalism as he takes away the former American ideals. It is convient that the Arab Nationalists have a different religion than the majority of Americans and also use their religion to better unite their people. People will always divide themselves from others and proclaim their superiority. I hav estudied many ethical systems and not satisfied that they would correct this problem.